2.42 

39s 


SPKBCH 


OF 


Hon.  WM.  J.  BRYAN 

OF  NEBRASKA, 


In  the  House  of  Representatives, 


Wednesday,  Angtist  1893. 


Washington,  D.  C.  : 
Gko.  R.  Gray,  Printeb, 
1893. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/speechofhonwmjbrOObrya 


THK  ANI>  SIf.VKR  OF  THE  COI^S TITETIOM. 


“  Dessaix  has  never  taught  me  retreat,  but  I  can  beat  a  charge.  Oh,  I  can  beat  a  charge  that 
would  make  the  dead  fall  into  line !  I  beat  that  charge  at  the  Bridge  of  Lodi ;  I  beat  it  at  Mount 
Taoor  ;  I  beat  it  at  the  Pyramids ;  oh,  may  I  beat  it  here?  Muehlbach. 


SPEECH 

OF 

HOlf.  ¥IL1IAI  J.  BEYAN, 

OF  NEBRASKA, 


In  the  House  of  Representatives, 
Wednesday,  August  16,  lvS93. 


'  The  House  having  under  consideration  the  bill  (H.  R.  1)  to  repeal  the  purchasing  clause  of  the 
'  Sherman  act. 

V. 

/  Mr.  BRYAN  said : 

}  Mr.  Speaker  :  I  shall  accomplish  my  full  purpose  if  I  am  able  to  impress 
upon  the  members  of  the  House  the  far-reaching  consequences  which  may 
follow  our  action  and  quicken  their  appreciation  of  the  grave  responsibility  which 
presses  upon  us.  Historians  tell  us  that  the  victory  of  Charles  Martel  at  Tours 
determined  the  history  of  all  Europe  for  centuries.  It  was  a  contest  “  between  the 
Crescent  and  the  Cross,”  and  when,  on  that  fateful  day,  the  Frankish  prince  drove 
back  the  followers  of  Abderrabman  he  rescued  the  West  from  “the  all-destroying 
grasp  of  Islam,”  and  saved  to  Europe  its  Christian  civilization.  A  greater  than 
Tours  is  here !  In  my  humble  judgment  the  vote  of  this  House  on  the  subject 
under  consideration  may  bring  to  the  people  of  the  West  and  South,  to  the  people 
of  the  United  States,  and  to  all  mankind,  weal  or  woe  beyond  the  power  of  lan¬ 
guage  to  describe  or  imagination  to  conceive. 

In  the  princely  palace  and  in  the  humblest  hamlet;  by  the  financier  and  by  the 
poorest  toiler ;  here,  in  Europe  and  every  where,  the  proceedings  of  this  Congress, 
upon  this  problem  will  be  read  and  studied  ;  and  as  our  actions  bless  or  blight  we 
shall  be  commended  or  condemned.  The  President  of  the  United  States,  In  the 
discharge  of  bis  duty  as  he  sees  it,  has  sent  to  Congress  a  message  calling  attention 
to  ths  present  financial  situation,  and  recommending  the  unconditional  repeal  of 
the  She’-iiian  law  as  the  only  means  of  securing  immediate  relief.  Some  outside 
of  this  hall  have  insisted  that  the  President’s  recommendation  imposes  upon 
Democratic  members  an  obligation,  as  it  were,  to  carry  out  his  wishes,  and  over- 
izealous  friend  j  have  even  suggested  that  opposition  to  his  views  might  subject  the 
iiardy  dissenter  to  admiuistrative  displeasure.  They  do  the  President  great 


injustice  who  presume  that  he  would  forget  for  a  moment  the  independence  of  the 
two  branches  of  Congress.  He  would  not  be  worthy  of  our  r-dmiration  or  even 
respect  if  he  demanded  a  homage  which  would  violate  the  primary  principles  of 
free  representative  government. 

TO  WHOM  ARE  WE  RESPONSIBLE? 

L'^t  his  own  language  rebuke  those  who  would  disregard  their  pledges  to  their 
own  people  in  order  to  display  a  false  fealty.  In  the  message  which  he  sent  to 
Congress  in  December,  1885,  he  said,  in  words  which  may  well  be  our  guide  in  this 
great  crisis:  “The  zealous  watchfulness  of  our  constituencies,  great  and  small, 
supplements  their  suffrages,  and  b^^fore  the  tribunal  they  establish  every  public 
servant  should  be  judged.”  Among  the  many  grand  truths  expressed  felicitously 
by  the  Presidpnt  during  his  public  career  none  show  a  truer  conception  of  official 
duty  or  describe  with  more  clearness  the  body  from  which  the  member  receives 
his  authority  and  to  which  he  owes  his  responsibility. 

Yes,  Mr.  Speaker,  it  is  before  the  tribunal  established  by  our  constituencies,  and 
before  that  tribunal  only  that  we  must  appear  for  judgment  upon  our  actions  here. 
When  we  each  accepted  a  commission  from  180,000  people  we  pledged  ourselves 
to  protect  their  rights  from  invasion  and  to  reflect  their  wishes  to  the  best  of  ©ur 
ability,  and  we  must  stand  defenseless  before  the  bar  if  our  only  excuse  is  “he 
recommended  it.”  And  remember,  sir,  that  these  constituencies  include  not 
bankers,  brokers,  and  boards  of  trade  only,  but  embrace  people  in  every  station 
and  condition  of  life ;  and  in  that  great  court  from  whose  decision  there  is  no 
appeal  every  voter  has  an  equal  voice.  That  the  Democratic  party  understands 
the  duty  of  the  Representative,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  it  found  it  necessary 
to  nonconcur  in  a  similar  recommendation  mede  by  the  President  in  1885. 
t  In  the  message  which  he  sent  to  the  Forty-ninth  Congress,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  first  session,  we  find  these  words  : 

Prosperity  hesitates  upon  our  threshold  becau.se  the  dangers  and  uncertainties  surrounding  this 
question.  Capital  timidly  shrinks  from  trade,  and  investors  are  unwilling  to  take  the  chance  of  the 
questionable  shape  in  which  their  money  will  be  returned  to  them,  while  enterprise  halts  at  a  risk 
against  which  care  and  sagacious  mana^^ement  do  not  protect. 

As  a  necessary  consequence,  labor  lacks  employment,  and  suSering  and  distress  are  visited  upon 
a  portion  of  our  fellow-citizens  especially  entitled  to  the  careful  consideration  of  those  charged 
with  the  duties  of  legislation.  No  interest  appeals  to  us  so  strongly  for  a  safe  and  stable  currency 
as  the  vast  army  of  the  unemployed.  I  recommend  the  suspension  of  the  compulsory  coinage  ot 
silver  dollars,  directed  by  the  law  passed  in  February,  1878. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  same  forces  were  at  work  then  as  now ;  the  same  appre¬ 
hensions  existed  as  now ;  the  same  pressure  was  brought  from  the  same  sources  in 
f.ivor  of  the  debasement  of  silver;  but  the  members  of  Congress,  refusing  to  take 
counsel  of  their  fears,  stood  by  the  record  of  both  great  parties  and  by  the  Nation’s 
history  and  retained  the  coinage  of  silver  as  then  provided  fir.  Le*t  it  be  said  to 
the  credit  of  the  Democratic  party  that  in  the  House  only  33  of  its  members  voted 
to  suTpend  the  Bland  law,  while  130  are  recorded  against  suspension.  Time  has 
proved  that  the  members,  reflecting  the  opinions  of  their  people,  were  wiser  than 
the  Executive,  and  he  is  doubtless  grateful  to  day  that  they  did  not  follow  his 
BUgg;sion. 

THE  MESSAGE. 

I  have  read  with  care  the  message  sent  to  us  last  week,  and  have  considered  it 
in  the  light  of  every  reasonable  construction  of  which  it  is  capable.  If  I  am  able 
to  understand  its  language  it  points  to  the  burial  of  silver,  with  no  promise  of 
resurrection.  Its  reasoning  is  in  the  direction  of  a  single  standard.  It  leads  irre¬ 
sistibly  to  universal  gold  monometallhm— to  a  realm  over  whose  door  is  written  : 
“Abandon  hope,  all  ye  who  enter  here !  ”  Before  that  door  I  stop,  appalled.  Have 
gentlemen  considered  the  efllect  of  a  single  gold  standard  universally  adopted? 
Let  us  not  deceive  ourselves  with  the  hope  that  we  can  discard  silver  for  gold,  and 
that  other  nations  will  take  it  up  and  keep  it  as  a  part  of  the  world’s  currency. 
When  all  the  silver  available  for  coinage  could  gain  admission  to  some  mints  and 


5 


all  the  gold  available  for  coinage  would  find  a  place  for  mintage,  and  some  nation 
like  France  maintained  the  parity  by  means  of  bimetallism  it  was  of  comparatively 
little  importance  whether  a  particular  nation  used  silver,  or  gold,  or  both. 

Exchange  did  not  fluctuate  and  trade  could  be  carried  on  without  inconvenience. 
But  times  have  changed.  One  nation  after  another  has  closed  its  mints  to  silver 
until  the  white  metal  has,  in  European  countries,  been  made  an  outcast  by  legisla¬ 
tion  and  has  shosvn  a  bullion  value  different  from  its  coinage  value.  India,  at 
lasit,  guided  by  the  misrepresentations  of  the  metropolitan  press,  which  proclaimed 
as  certain  what  was  never  probable,  has  suspended  free  coinage,  fearing  that  this 
country  would  stop  the  purchase  of  silver.  If  the  United  States,  the  greatest 
silver  producing  nation,  which  now  utilizes  more  than  one-third  of  the  total  annual 
product  of  the  world,  closes  its  mint  to  the  coinage  of  silver,  what  assurance  have 
we  that  it  can  retain  its  place  as  primary  money  in  the  commercial  world? 

Is  it  not  more  reasonable  to  suppose  that  a  further  fall  in  the  bullion  value  of  sil¬ 
ver  will  be  followed  by  ademand  foralimitation  of  the  legal  tender  qualities  of  the 
silver  already  in  existence?  That  is  already  being  urged  by  some.  Is  it  not 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  our  hostile  action  will  lead  to  hostile  action  on  the  part 
of  other  nations  ?  Every  country  must  have  money  for  its  people,  and  if  silver  is 
abandoned  and  gold  substituted  it 

AN  HONEST  DOLLAR 

must  be  drawn  from  the  world’s  already  scanty  supply.  We  hear  much  about  a 
“  stable  currency  ”  and  an  “  honest  dollar.’’  It  is  a  significant  fact  that  those  who 
have  spoken  in  favor  of  unconditional  repeal  have  for  the  most  part  avoided  a  dis¬ 
cussion  of  the  effect  of  an  appreciating  standard.  They  take  it  for  granted  that  a 
gold  standard  is  not  only  an  honest  standard,  but  the  only  stable  standard.  I 
denounce  that  child  of  ignorance  and  avarice,  the  gold  dollar  under  a  universal 
gold  standard,  as  the  most  dishonest  dollar  which  we  could  employ. 

I  stand  upon  the  authority  of  every  intelligent  writer  upon  political  economy 
when  I  assert  that  there  is  not  a  id  never  has  been  an  honest  dollar.  An  honest 
dollar  is  a  dollar  absolutely  stable  in  relation  to  all  other  things.  Laughlin,  in  his 
work  on  Bimetallism,  says  : 

ISIonometallists  do  not— as  is  often  said— believe  that  gold  remains  absolutely  stable  in  value. 
They  hold  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  *'  standard  of  value  ”  for  future  payments  in  either  gold 
or  silver  which  remains  absolutely  invariable. 

He  even  suggests  a  multiple  standard  for  long-tima  contracts.  I  quote  his 
words ; 

As  regards  National  debts,  it  is  distinctly  averred  that  neither  gold  nor  silver  forms  a  just  mecxsure 
of  deferred  payments,  and  that  if  justice'  in  long  contracts  is  sought  for,  we  should  not  seek  it  by 
the  doubtful  and  untried  expedient  of  international  bimetallism,  but  by  the  clear  and  certain 
method  of  a  multiple  standard,  a  unit  based  upon  the  selling  prices  of  a  number  of  articles  of 
general  consumption.  A  long-time  contract  would  thereby  be  paid  at  its  maturity  by  the  same  pur¬ 
chasing  power  as  was  given  in  the  beginning. 

Jevons,  one  of  the  most  gmerally  accepted  of  the  writers  in  favor  of  a  gold 
■standard,  admits  the  instability  of  a  single  standard,  and  in  language  very  similar 
to  that  above  quoted  suggests  the  multiple  standard  as  the  most  equitable  if  prac¬ 
ticable.  Cnevalier,  who  wrote  a  book  in  1858  to  show  the  injustice  of  allowing  a 
debtor  to  pay  his  debts  in  a  cheap  gold  dollar,  recognized  the  same  fact,  and  said : 

II  the  value  of  the  metal  declined,  the  creditor  would  suffer  a  loss  upon  the  quantity  he  had 
received,  if,  on  the  contrary,  it  rose,  the  debtor  would  have  to  pay  more  than  he  calculated  upon* 

I  am  on  sound  and  scientific  ground,  therefore,  when  I_  say  that  a  dollar 
approaches  honesty  as  its  purchasing  power  approaches  stability.  If  I  borrow  a 
thousand  dollars  to-day  and  next  year  pay  the  debt  with  a  thousand  dollars  which 
will  secure  exactly  as  much  of  all  things  desirable  as  the  one  thousand  which  I 
borrowed,  I  have  paid  in  honest  dollars.  If  the  money  has  increased  or  decreased 
in  purchasing  power,  I  have  satisfied  my  debt  with  dishonest  dollars.  While  the 
Government  can  say  that  a  given  weight  of  gold  or  silver  shall  constitute  a  dollar, 


4 


6 


and  invest  that  dollar  with  legal-tender  qualities,  it  cannot  hx  the  purchasing 
power  of  the  dollar.  That  must  depend  upon  the  law  of  supply  and  demand,  and 
it  may  be  well  to  suggest  that  this  Government  never  tried  to  fix  the  exchangeable 
value  of  a  dollar  until  it  began  to  limit  the  number  of  dollars  coined. 

DOLLARS  RISE  AND  FALL. 

If  the  number  of  dollars  increasee  more  rapidly  than  the  need  for  dollars— as  i 
did  after  the  gold  discoveries  of  1849 — the  exchangeable  value  of  each  dollar  wiU 
fall  and  prices  rise.  If  the  demand  for  dollars  increases  faster  that  the  number  of 
dollars — as  it  did  after  I8C0— the  price  of  each  dollar  will  rise  and  prices  generally 
will  fall.  The  relative  value  of  the  dollar  may  be  changed  by  natural  causes  or  by 
legislation.  An  increased  supply — the  demand  remaining  the  same — or  a  decreased 
demand — the  supply  remaining  the  same — will  reduce  the  exchangeable  value  of 
each  dollar.  Natural  causes  may  act  on  both  supply  and  demand  ;  as,  for  instance, 
by  increasing  the  product  from  the  mines  or  by  increasing  the  amount  consumed  in 
the  arts.  Legislation  acts  directly  on  the  demand,  and  thus  affects  the  price,  since 
the  demand  is  one  of  the  factors  in  fixing  the  price. 

If  by  legislative  action  the  demand  for  silver  is  destroyed  and  the  demand  for 
gold  is  increased  by  making  it  the  only  standard,  the  exchangeable  value  of  each 
unit  of  that  standard,  or  dollar,  as  we  call  it,  will  be  increased.  If  the  exchange¬ 
able  value  of  the  dollar  is  increased  by  legislation  the  debt  of  the  debtor  is  increased, 
to  his  injury  and  to  the  advantage  of  the  creditor.  And  let  me  suggest  here,  in 
reply  to  the  gentleman  from  Massachusetts  [Mr.  McCall],  who  said  that  the  money 
loaner  was  entitled  to  the  advantages  derived  from  improved  machinery  and 
inventive  genius,  that  he  is  mistaken.  The  laboring  man  and  the  producer  are 
entitled  to  these  benefits,  and  the  money  loaner,  by  every  law  of  justice,  ought  to 
be  content  with  a  dollar  equal  in  purchasing  power  to  the  dollar  which  he  loaned, 
and  any  one  desiring  more  than  that  desires  a  dishonest  dollar,  it  matters  not  what 
name  he  may  give  to  it.  [Loud  applause.]  Take  an  illustration:  John  Doe,  of 
Nebraska,  has  a  farm  worth  $2,000  and  mortgages  it  to  Richard  Roe,  of  Massachu¬ 
setts,  for  11,000.  Suppose  the  value  of  the  monetary  unit  U  increased  by  legislation 
w’hich  creates  a  greater  demand  for  gold.  The  debt  is  increased.  If  the  increase 
amounts  to  100  per  cent,  the  Nebraska  farmer  finds  that  the  prices  of  his  products 
have  fallen  one  half  and  his  land  loses  one  half  its  value,  unless  the  price  is  main¬ 
tained  by  the  increased  population  incident  to  a  new  country. 

The  mortgage  remains  nominally  the  same,  though  the  debt  has  actually  become 
twice  as  great.  Will  he  be  deceived  by  the  cry  of  “  honest  dollar.?  ”  If  he  should 
loan  a  Nebraska  neighb  or  a  hog  weighing  100  pounds  and  the  next  spring  demand 
in  return  a  hog  weighing  200  pounds  he  would  be  called  dishonest,  even  though 
he  contended  that  he  was  only  demanding  one  hog — ^just  the  number  he  loaned. 
Society  has  become  accustomed  to  some  very  nice  distinctions.  Tne  poor  man  is 
called  a  socialist  if  he  believes  that  the  wealth  of  the  rich  should  be  divided  among 
the  poor,  but  the  rich  man  is  called  a  financier  if  he  devises  a  plan  by  which  the 
pittance  of  the  poor  can  be  converted  to  his  use.  [Laughter  and  applause.] 

The  poor  man  who  takes  property  by  force  is  called  a  thief,  but  the  creditor  who 
can  by  legislation  make  a  debtor  pay  a  dollar  twice  aiJ  large  as  he  borrowed  is 
lauded  as  the  friend  of  a  sound  currency.  [Laughter  and  applause.]  The  man  who 
wants  the  people  to  destroy  the  Government  is  an  anarchist,  but  the  man  who 
wants  the  Government  to  destroy  the  people  is  a  patriot.  [Applause.] 

CXINFIDENCE  MUST  BE  RESTORED. 

The  great  desire  now  seems  to  be  to  restore  confidence,  and  some  have  an  idea 
that  the  only  way  to  restore  confidence  is  to  coax  the  money  loaner  to  let  go  of 
his  hoard  by  making  the  profits  too  tempting  to  be  resisted.  Capital  is  repre¬ 
sented  as  a  shy  and  timid  maiden  who  must  be  courted,  if  won.  Let  me  suggest 
a  plan  for  bringing  money  from  Europe.  If  it  be  possible,  let  us  enact  a  law 
“Whereas  confidence  must  be  restored;  and  whereas  money  will  always  come 


7 


from  its  hiding  place  if  the  induceoaent  is  sufficient:  Therefore,  be  it  enacted, 
*  That  every  man  who  borrows  $1  shall  pay  back  |2  and  interest  (the  usury  law 
not  to  be  enforced).” 

•  'Would  not  English  capital  come  “  on  the  swiftest  ocean  greyhounds  ?  ”  The 
money  loaner  of  London  would  say  :  “  I  will  not  loan  in  India  or  Egypt  or  in  South 
America.  The  inhabitants  of  those  countries  are  a  wicked  and  ungodly  people 
aiid  refuse  to  pay  more  than  they  borrowed.  I  will  loan  in  the  United  States,  for 
there  lives  an  honest  people,  who  delight  in  a  sound  currency  and  pay  in  an 
honest  dollar.”  Why  does  not  some  one  propose  that  plan?  Because  no  one 
would  dare  to  increase  by  law  the  number  of  dollars  which  the  debtor  must  pay, 
and  yet  by  some  it  is  called  wise  statesmanship  to  do  indirectly  and  in  the  dark 
what  no  man  has  the  temerity  to  propose  directly  and  openly. 

WHAT  DOES  A  GOLD  STANDARD  MEAN? 

We  have  been  called  cranks  and  lunatics  and  idots  because  we  have  warned  our 
fellow-men  against  the  inevitable  and  intolerable  consequences  which  would  follow 
the  adoption  of  a  gold  standard  by  all  the  world.  But  who,  I  ask.  can  be  silent  in 
the  presence  of  such  impending  calamities?  The  United  States,  England,  France, 
and  Germany  own  to-day  about  $2,600,000,000  of  the  world’s  supply  of  gold  coin, 
or  about  five-sevenths  of  the  total  amount,  and  yet  these  four  nations  contain  but 
a  small  fraction  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  globe.  What  will  be  the  exchangeable 
value  of  a  gold  dollar  when  India’s  people,  out-  numbering  alone  the  inhabitants  of 
the  four  great  nations  named,  reach  out  after  their  share  of  gold  coin  ?  What  will 
be  the  final  price  of  gold  when  all  the  nations  of  the  Occident  and  Orient  join  in 
the  scramble  ? 

A  distinguished  advocate  of  the  gold  standard  said  recently,  in  substance: 
“  Wheat  has  now  reached  a  point  where  the  English  can  afford  to  buy  it,  and  gold 
will  soon  return  to  relieve  our  financial  embarrassment.”  How  delighted  the 
farmer  will  be  when  he  realizes  what  an  opportunity  he  has  to  save  his  country  I 
A  nation  in  distress ;  banks  failing ;  mines  closed ;  laborers  unemployed ;  enter¬ 
prise  at  a  standstill,  and  behold,  the  farmer,  bowed  with  unceasing,  even  if  unre- 
munerative,  toil,  steps  forth  to  save  his  country — by  selling  his  wheat  below  the 
cost  of  production!  And  I  am  afraid  he  will  even  now  be  censured  for  allowing 
the  panic  to  go  as  far  as  it  has  before  reducing  his  prices. 

It  seems  cruel  that  upon  the  growers  of  wheat  and  cotton,  our  staple  exports, 
should  be  placed  the  burden  of  supplying  us,  at  whatever  cost,  with  the  necessary 
gold,  and  yet  the  financier  quoted  has  suggested  the  only  means,  except  the  issue 
of  bonds,  by  which  our  stock  of  gold  can  be  replenished.  If  it  is  difficult  now  to 
secure  gold,  what  will  be  the  condition  when  the  demand  is  increased  by  its  adop¬ 
tion  as  the  world’s  only  primary  money?  We  would  simply  put  gold  upon  an  auction 
block,  with  every  nation  as  a  bidder,  and  each  ounce  of  the  standard  metal  would 
be  knocked  down  to  the  one  offering  the  most  of  all  other  kinds  of  property. 
Every  disturbance  of  finance  in  one  country  would  communicate  itself  to  every 
other,  and  in  the  misery  which  would  follow  it  would  be  of  little  consolation  to 
know  that  others  were  suffering  as  much  as,  or  more  than,  we. 

THE  SUFFERING  CONTINUOUS. 

I  have  only  spoken  of  the  immediate  effects  of  the  substitution  of  gold  as  the 
world’s  only  money  of  ultimate  redemption.  The  worst  remains  to  be  told.  If, 
as  in  the  resumption  of  specie  payments  in  1879,  we  could  look  forward  to  a  time 
when  the  contraction  would  cease,  the  debtor  might  become  a  tenant  upon  his 
former  estate  and  the  home  owner  assume  the  role  of  the  homeless  with  the  sweet 
assurance  that  his  children  or  his  children’s  children  might  live  to  enjoy  the  bless¬ 
ings  of  a  “stable  currency.”  But,  sir,  the  hapless  and  hopeless  producer  of  wealth 
goes  forth  into  a  night  illuminated  by  no  star;  he  embarks  upon  a  sea  whose 
further  shore  no  mariner  may  find ;  he  travels  in  a  desert  where  the  ever-relreat- 
ing  mirage  makes  his  disappointment  a  thousand-fold  more  keen.  Let  the  world 
■ '  once  commit  its  fortunes  to  the  use  of  gold  alone  and  it  must  depend  upon  the 
annual  increase  of  that  metal  to  keep  pace  with  the  need  for  money. 


1 

1 

/■ 


8 


The  Director  of  the  Mint  gives  about  $130,000,000  as  the  world’s  production  last 
year.  Something  like  one^third  is  produced  in  connection  with  silver,  and  must 
be  lost  if  silver  mining  is  rendered  unproductive.  It  is  estimated  that  nearly  two-  » 
thirds  of  the  annual  product  is  used  in  the  arts,  and  the  amount  so  used  is  increas¬ 
ing.  Where,  then,  is  the  supply  to  meet  the  increasing  demands  of  an  increasing 
population  ?  Is  there  some  new  California  or  some  undiscovered  Australia  yet  to 
be  explored  ? 

Is  it  not  probable  that  the  supply  available  for  coinage  will  diminish  rather 
than  increase?  Jacobs,  in  his  work  on  the  Precious  Metals,  has  calculated  tb^ 
appreciation  of  the  monetary  unit.  He  has  shown  that  the  almost  imperceptible 
increase  of  2  per  cent,  per  year  will  amount  to  a  total  appreciation  of  500  per  cent, 
in  a  century.  Or,  to  illustrate,  that  cotton  at  10  cents  to-day  and  wheat  at  60  cents 
would  mean  cotton  at  2  cents  and  wheat  at  12  cents  in  one  hundred  years.  A 
national.  State  or  municipal  debt  renewed  from  time  to  time  would,  at  the  end  of 
that  period,  be  six  times  as  great  as  when  contracted,  although  several  times  the 
amount  would  have  been  paid  in  interest. 

When  one  realizes  the  full  significance  of  a  constantly  appreciating  standard  he 
can  easily  agree  with  Alison  that  the  Dark  Ages  resulted  from  a  failure  of  the 
money  supply.  How  can  anyone  view  with  unconcern  the  attempt  to  turn  back 
the  tide  of  civilization  by  the  complete  debasement  of  one-half  of  the  world’s 
money  I  When  I  point  to  the  distress  which,  not  suddenly,  but  gradually  is  enter¬ 
ing  the  habitations  of  our  people;  when  I  refer  you  to  the  census  as  conclusive 
evidence  of  the  unequal  distribution  of  wealth  and  of  increasing  tenancy  among 
our  people,  of  whom,  in  our  cities,  less  than  one-fourth  now  own  their  homes ; 
when  I  suggest  the  possibility  of  this  condition  continuing  unti’,  passed  from  a 
land  of  independent  owners,  we  become  a  nation  of  landlords  and  tenants,  you 
must  tremble  for  civil  liberty  itself. 

FEEE  GOVERNMENT  IN  DANGER. 

Free  government  cannot  long  survive  when  the  thousands  enjoy  the  wealth  of 
the  country  and  the  millions  share  its  poverty  in  common.  Even  now  you  hear 
among  the  rich  an  occasionally  expressed  contempt  for  popular  government,  and 
among  the  poor  a  protest  against  legislation  which  makes  them  “toil  that  others 
may  reap.”  I  appeal  to  you  to  restore  justice  and  bring  back  prosperity  while  yet 
a  peaceable  solution  can  be  secured.  We  mourn  the  lot  of  unhappy  Ireland, 
whose  alien  owners  drain  it  of  its  home  created  wealth ;  but  we  may  reach  a  con¬ 
dition,  if  present  tendencies  continue,  when  her  position  at  this  time  will  be  an 
object  of  envy,  and  some  poet  may  write  of  our  cities  as  Goldsmith  did  of  the 
“  Deserted  Village :  ” 

While  scourged  by  famine  from  a  smiling  land, 

The  mournful  peasant  leads  his  humble  band, 

And,  while  he  sinks  without  one  hand  to  save. 

The  country  blooms— a  garden  and  a  grave.  • 

But,  lest  I  may  be  accused  of  reasonless  ccmplaining,  let  me  call  unimpeachable 
witnesses  who  will  testify  to  the  truth  of  my  premises  and  to  the  correctness  of 
my  conclusions. 

UNIMPEACHABLE  WITNESSES. 

Jevons  says: 

If  all  nations  of  the  globe  were  suddenly  and  simultaneously  to  demonetize  silver  and  require 
gold  money  a  revolution  in  the  value  of  gold  would  be  inevitable. 

Gifl&n,  who  is  probably  the  mrs‘;  fanatical  adherent  of  the  gold  standard,  says,  in 
his  book  entitled  The  Case  Against  Bimetallism  : 

The  primary  offender  in  the  matter,  perhaps,  w’as  Germany,  which  made  a  mistake,  as  I  believe, 
in  eubstitnting  gold  for  silver  as  the  standard  money  of  the  country.  *  *  *  To  some  extent  also 
Italy  has  been  an  offender  in  this  matter,  the  resumption  of  specie  payments  in  that  countrv  on  a 
gold  basis  being  entirely  a  work  of  superfluity  ;  the  resumption  on  a  silver  basis  would  have'  been 
preferable.  *  *  *  No  doubt  the  pressure  on  gold  w’ould  have  been  more  severe  than  it  has  been 
if  the  United  States  had  not  passed  the  Bland  coinage  law. 


9 

The  gentleman  from  Maryland  [Mr.  Raynkr]  said  in  the  opening  speech  of  this 
debate : 

In  my  opinion  there  is  not  a  sufficient  amount  of  gold  in  existence  to  supply  the  demands  of 
commerce  and  the  necessities  of  the  world’s  circulation! 

Mr.  Balfour,  member  of  Parliament,  in  a  speech  recently  made,  said  : 

Let  Germany,  India,  and  the  United  States  try  a  gold  currency  and  a  tremor  seizes  every  one  of 
our  commercial  magnates.  They  look  forward,  in  the  immediate  future,  to  catastrophe,  and  feel 
that  the  ultimate  result  may  be  a  slow  appreciation  of  the  standard  of  value,  which  is  perhaps  the 
most  deadening  and  benumbing  indue-nce  that  can  touch  the  enterprise  of  a  nation. 

Mr.  Goschen,  delegate  from  Great  Britain,  said  at  the  International  Monetary 
Conference  in  1878 : 

If,  however,  other  States  were  to  carry  on  a  propaganda  in  favor  of  a  gold  standard  and  the 
demonetization  of  silver,  the  Indian  government  would  be  obliged  to  reconsider  its  position  and 
might  be  forced  by  events  to  take  measures  similar  to  those  taken  elsewhere.  In  that  case  the 
scramble  to  get  rid  of  silver  might  provoke  one  of  the  gravest  crises  ever  undergone  by  commerce. 
One  or  two  States  might  demonetize  silver  without  serious  results,  but  if  all  demonetize  there  would 
be  no  buyers,  and  silver  would  fall  in  alarming  proportions.  *  *  *  if  all  States  should  resolve 
on  the  adoption  of  a  gold  standard,  the  question  arose,  would  there  be  sufficient  gold  for  the  pur¬ 
pose  without  a  tremendous  crisis  ?  There  would  be  a  fear  on  the  one  hand  of  a  depreciation  of 
silver,  and  one  on  the  other  of  a  rise  in  the  value  of  gold,  and  a  corresponding  fall  in  the  prices  of 
all  commodities. 

Italy,  Russia,  and  Austria,  whenever  they  resume  specie  payments,  would  require  metal,  and  if 
all  other  States  went  in  the  direction  of  a  gold  standard,  these  countries  too  would  be  forced  to  take 
gold.  Resumption  on  their  part  would  be  facilitated  by  the  maintenance  of  silver  as  a  part  of  the 
legal  tender  of  the  world.  The  American  proposal  for  a'  universal  double  standard  seemed  impossi¬ 
ble  of  realization,  a  veritable  Utopia ;  but  the  theory  of  a  universal  gold  standard  was  Utopian,  and 
Indeed  involved  a  false  Utopia.  It  was  better  for  the  world  at  large  that  the  two  metals  should 
continue  in  circulation  than  that  one  should  be  universally  substituted  for  the  other. 


AMERICAN  AUTHORITY. 

Thus  does  an  eminent  English  monometallist  denounce  the  idea  of  a  universal 
gold  standard  and  foretell  its  consequences.  But  we  are  not  dependent  for 
authority  upon  foreign  advocates  of  a  single  standard.  Read  the  words  of  him 
who  for  many  years  was  the  guiding  genius  of  the  Republican  party,  Hon. 
James  G.  Blaine,  and  say  whether  he  was  a  lunatic  because  he  described  in 
emphatic  words  the  dangers  attendant  upon  universal  monometallism.  He  said 
upon  the  floor  of  the  House,  February  7,  1878  : 

On  the  much  vexed  and  long  mooted  question  as  to  a  bimetallic  or  monometallic  standard,  my 
own  views  are  sufficiently  indicated  in  the  remarks  I  have  made.  I  believe  the  struggle  now  going 
on  in  this  country  and  in  other  countries  for  a  single  gold  standard  would,  if  successful,  produce 
widespread  disaster  in  and  throughout  the  commerical  world. 

The  destruction  of  silver  as  money  and  establishing  gold  as  the  sole  unit  of  value  must  have  a 
ruinous  effect  on  all  forms  of  property  except  those  investments  which  yield  a  fixed  return  in  money. 
These  would  be  enormously  enhanced  in  value,  and  would  gain  a  disproportionate  and  unfair 
advantage  over  every  other  species  of  property.  If,  as  the  most  reliable  statistics  affirm,  there  are 
nearly  $7,000,000,000  of  coin  or  bullion  in  the  world,  not  very  unequally  divided  between  gold  and 
silver,  it  is  impossible  to  strike  silver  out  of  existence  as  money  without  results  which  will  prove 
distressing  to  millions  and  utterly  disastrous  to  tens  of  thousands. 

Again,  he  said ; 

I  believe  gold  and  silver  coin  to  be  the  money  of  the  Constitution ;  indeed,  the  money  of  the 
American  people,  anterior  to  the  Constitution  which  the  great  organic  law  recognized  as  quite  inde¬ 
pendent  of  its  own  existence.  No  power  was  conferred  on  Congress  to  declare  either  metal  should 
not  be  money.  Congress  has,  therefore,  in  my  judgment,  no  power  to  demonetize  silver  any  more 
than  to  demonetize  gold. 

Senator  Sherman  said  in  1869 ; 

The  contraction  of  the  currency  is  a  far  more  distressing  operation  than  Senators  suppose.  Our  own 
and  other  nations  have  gone  through  that  operation  before.  It  is  not  possible  to  take  that  voyage 
without  the  sorest  distress.  To  every  person  except  a  capitalist  out  of  debt,  or  a  salaried  officer  or 
annuitant,  it  is  a  period  of  loss,  danger,  la3.sltude  of  trade,  fall  of  wages,  suspension  of  enterprise, 
bankruptcy,  and  disaster.  It  means  ruin  of  all  dealers  whose  debts  are  twice  their  business  capital, 
though  one-third  less  than  their  actual  property.  It  means  the  fall  of  all  agricultural  production 
without  any  ^reat  reduction  of  taxes.  What  prudent  man  would  dare  to  build  a  house,  a  railroad,  a 
factory,  or  a  barn  with  this  certain  fact  before  him  ? 


0 


10 


Let  me  quote  from  an  apostle  of  the  Democratic  fahh,  whose  distinguished  ser- 
Tices  in  behalf  of  his  party  and  his  country  have  won  for  him  the  esteem  of  all. 
Mr.  Carlisle,  then  a  member  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  said,  February  21, 
1878: 

I 

know  that  the  world’s  stock  of  precious  metals  is  none  too  large,  and  I  see  no  reason  to  apprehend 
that  it  will  ever  be  so.  Mankind  will  be  fortunate  indeed  if  the  annual  production  of  gold  and 
silver  coin  shall  keep  pace  with  the  annual  increae  of  popirlation,  and  industry.  According  to  my 
views  of  the  subject  the  conspiracy  which  seems  to  have  been  formed  here  and  in  Europe  to 
destroy  by  legislation  and  otherwise  from  three-sevenths  to  one-half  the  metallic  money  oi  the 
world  is  the  most  gigantic  crime  of  this  or  any  other  age.  The  consummation  of  such  a  scheme 
would  ultimately  entail  more  misery  upon  the  human  race  than  all  the  wars,  pestilences,  and' 
famines  than  ever  occurred  in  the  history  of  the  Avorld. 

The  absolute  and  instantaneous  destruction  of  half  the  entire  movable  property  of  the  world, 
including  houses,  ships,  railroads,  and  other  appliances  for  carrying  on  commerce, while  it  would  be 
felt  more  sensibly  at  the  moment,  would  not  produce  anything  like  the  prolonged  distress  and  dis¬ 
organization  of  society  that  must  inevitably  result  from  the  permanent  annihilation  of  one-half  the 
metallic  money  of  the  world. 

The  janior  Senator  from  Texas  [Mr.  Mills]  never  did  the  party  greater  service 
than  n»^n,  on  the  3d  of  February,  1886,  on  this  floor  he  denounced,  in  language  the 
force  and  earnestness  of  which  can  not  be  surpassed,  the  attempted  crime  against 
silver.  Let  his  words  be  an  inspiration  now  : 

But  in  all  the  wild,  reckless,  and  remorseless  brutalities  that  have  marked  the  footprints  of  resist¬ 
less  power  there  is  some  extenuating  circumstance  that  mitigates  the  severity  of  the  punishment 
due  the  crime.  Some  have  been  the  product  of  the  tierce  passions  of  war,  some  have  come  from  the 
antipathy  that  separates  alien  races,  some  from  the  superstitions  of  opposing  religions. 

But  the  crime  that  is  now  sought  to  be  perpetrated  on  more  than  fifty  millions  of  people  comes 
neither  from  the  camp  of  a  conqueror,  the  hand  of  a  foreigner,  nor  the  altar  of  an  idolator.  But  if 
comes  from  those  in  whose  veins  runs  the  blood  of  the  common  ancestry,  who  were  born  under  the, 
same  skies,  speak  the  same  language,  reared  in  the  same  institutions,  and  nurtured  in  the  princi¬ 
ples  of  the  same  religious  faith .  It  comes  from  the  cold,  phlegmatic,  marble  heart  of  avarice — 
avarice  that  seeks  to  paralyze  labor,  increase  the  burden  of  debt,  and  fill  the  land  with  destitution 
and  suffering  to  gratify  the  lust  for  gold— avarice  surrounded  by  every  comfort  that  vvealth  can 
command,  and  rich  enough  to  satisfy  every  want  save  that  which  refuses  to  be  satisfied  without  the 
suffocation  and  strangulation  of  all  the  labor  of  the  land.  With  a  forehead  that  refuses  to  be 
ashamed  it  demands  of  Congress  an  act  that  will  paralyze  all  the  forces  of  production,  shut  out 
labor  from  all  employment,  increase  the  burden  of  debts  and  taxation,  and  send  desolation  and 
suffering  to  all  the  homes  of  the  poor. 

LANGUAGE  COULD  NOT  BE  STRONGER 

Can  language  be  stronger  or  conclusion  more  conclusive  ?  What  expression  can 
be  more  forcible  than  the  “  most  gigantic  crime  of  this  or  any  other  age  ?”  W hat 
picture  more  vivid  than  that  painted  in  the  words,  “  The  consummation  of  such  a 
scheme  would  uLimately  entail  more  misery  upon  the  human  race  than  all  the 
wars,  pestilences,  and  famines  that  ever  occurred  in  the  history  of  the  world  ?’^ 
What  more  scathing  rebuke  could  be  administered  to  avarice  than  that  contained  - 
in  the  words  of  Mr.  Mills? 

It  is  from  the  awful  horrors  described  by  these  distinguished  men,  diflPering  in 
politics,  but  united  in  sentiment,  that  I  beg  you,  sirs,  to  save  your  fellow- men. 

On  the  base  of  the  monument  erected  by  a  grateful  people  to  the  memory  of  the 
late  Senator  Hill,  of  Georgia,  are  inscribed  these  words : 

Who  saves  his  country  saves  himself,  and  all  things  saved  do  bless  him.  Who  lets  his  country 
die  lets  all  things  die,  dies  himself  ignobly,  and  all  things  dying,  curse  him. 

If,  sirs,  in  saving  jmur  country  you  save  yourselves  and  ^arn  the  benedictions  of 
all  things  saved,  how  much  greater  will  be  your  reward  if  your  efforts  save  not 
your  country  only  but  ail  mankind!  If  he  who  lets  hi's  country  die,  brings  upon 
himself  the  curses  of  all  things  dying;  in  what  language  will  an  indignant  people 
express  their  execration,  if  your  action  lead  to  the  enslavement  of  the  g -eat 
majority  of  the  people  by  the  universal  adoption  of  an  appreciating  standard ! 

BIMETALLISM. 

Let  me  call  your  attention  briefly  to  the  advantages  of  bimetallism.  It  is  not 
claimed  that  by  the  use  of  two  metals  at  a  fixed  ratio  absolute  stability  can  be 
secured.  We  only  contend  that  thus  the  monetary  unit  will  become  more  stable 


11 


in  relation  to  other  property  than  under  a  single  standard.  If  a  single  standard 
were  really  more  desirable  than  a  double  standard,  we  are  not  free  to  choose  gold, 
and  would  be  compelled  to  select  silver.  Gold  and  silver  must  remain  component 
parts  of  the  metallic  money  of  the  World — that  must  be  accepted  as  an  indispu¬ 
table  fact.  Our  abandonment  of  silver  would  in  all  probability  drive  it  out  of  use 
as  primary  money ;  and  silver  as  a  promise  to  pay  gold  is  little,  if  any,  better  than 
a  paper  promise  to  pay.  If  bimetallism  is  impossible,  then  we  must  make  up 
our  minds  to  a  silver  standard  or  to  the  abandonment  of  both  gold  and  silver. 
[Applause.] 

Let  us  suppose  the  worst  that  has  been  prophesied  by  our  opponents,  namely, 
that  we  would  be  upon  a  silver  standard  if  we  attempted  the  free  coinage  of  both 
gold  and  silver  at  any  ratio.  Let  us  suppose  that  all  our  gold  goes  to  Europe  and 
we  have  only  silver.  Silver  would  not  bO  inconvenient  to  use,  because  a  silver 
certificate  is  just  as  convenient  to  handle  as  a  gold  certificate,  and  the  silver  itself 
need  not  be  handled  except  where  it  is  necessary  for  change.  Gold  is  not  handled 
among  the  people.  No  one  desires  to  accept  any  large  amount  in  gold.  The  fact 
that  the  Treasury  has  always  on  hand  a  large  amount  of  gold  coin  deposited  in 
exchange  for  gold  certificaies  shows  that  the  paper  representative  is  more  desira¬ 
ble  than  the  metal  itself.  If,  following  out  the  supposition,  our  gold  goes  abroad, 
Europe  will  have  more  money  with  which  to  buy  our  exports — cotton  and  wheat, 
cattle  and  hogs. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  we  adopt  gold,  we  must  draw  it  from  Europe,  and  thus 
lessen  their  money  and  reduce  the  price  of  our  exports  in  foreign  markets.  This, 
too,  would  decrease  the  total  value  of  our  exports  and  increase  the  amount  of  pro¬ 
ducts  which  it  would  be  necessary  to  send  abroad  to  pay  the  principal  and  inter¬ 
est  which  we  owe  to  bondholders  and  stockholders  residing  in  Europe.  Some 
have  suggested  the  advisability  of  issuing  gold  bonds  in  order  to  maintain  a  gold 
standard.  Let  them  remember  that  those  bonds  sold  in  this  country  will  draw 
money  from  circulation  and  increase  the  stringency,  and  sold  abroad  will  affect 
injuriously  the  price  of  our  produces  abroad,  ti  us  making  a  double  tax  upon  the 
toilers  of  the  United  States,  who  mu-t  ultimately  pay  them. 

Let  them  remember^  too,  that  gold  bonds  held  abroad  must  sometime  be  paid 
in  gold,  and  the  exportation  of  that  gold  would  probably  raise  a  clamor  for  an  ex¬ 
tension  of  time  in  order  to  save  this  country  from  another  stringency.  A  silver 
standard,  too,  would  make  us  the  trading  centrewof  all  the  silver-using  countries 
of  the  world,  and  these  countries  contain  far  more  than  one-half  of  the  world’s 
population.  What  an  impetus  would  bs  given  to  our  VYeatern  and  Southern  sea¬ 
ports,  such  as  San  Francisco,  Galveston,  New  Orleans,  Mobile,  Savannah,  and 
Charleston.  Then,  again,  we  produce  our  silver,  and  produce  it  in  quantities 
which  would  to  some  extent  satisfy  our  monetary  needs. 

[Here  the  hsmm^r  fell.] 

On  motion  of  Mr.  Hunter  the  time  of  Mr.  Bryan  was  extended  indefi.nitely. 

Mr.  BRYAN.  I  ’hank  the  gentleman  from  Illinois  and  the  House. 

Our  annual  product  of  gold  is  le^s  than  50  cents  per  capita.  Deduct  from  this 
sum  the  loss  which  would  be  occasioned  to  the  gold  supply  by  the  closing  of  our 
silver  mines,  wh.ch  produce  gold  in  conjunction  with  silver;  deduct,  also, 
the  amount  consumed  in  the  arts,  and  the  amount  left  for  coinage  is  really  incon- 
sideiable.  Thus,  with  a  gold  standard,  we  would  be  left  dependent  upon  foreign 
powers  for  our  annual  money  supply.  They  say  we  must  adopt  a  gold  standard 
in  order  to  trade  with  Europe.  Why  not  reverse  the  proposition  and  say  that 
Europe  must  resume  the  use  of  silver  in  order  to  trade  with  us?  But  why  adopt 
either  gold  or  silver  alone  ?  Why  not  adopt  both  and  trade  with  both  gold-using 
and  silver  using  countries?  The  principle  of  bimetallism  is  established  upon  a 
scientific  basis. 

The  Government  does  not  try  to  fix  the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar,  either 
gold  or  silver.  It  simply  8ays,in  the  language  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  “The  morey  unit 
shall  stand  upon  the  two  metals,”  and  then  allowstheexchangeable  value  of  that 
unit  to  rise  or  fall  according  as  the  total  product  of  h  »t  h  mf-t  ils  decreases  or  increase^ 
in  proportion  to  the  demand  for  money.  In  attempting  to  maintain  the  pari^ 
between  the  two  metals  at  a  fixed  ratio,  the  (Tovernment  does  not  undertake 


12 


impossible.  France  for  several  years  did  maintain  the  parity  approximately  at 
16J  to  1  by  offering  unlimited  coinage  to  both  metals  at  that  ratio.  It  is  very 
common  for  some  people  to  urge,  “  You  cannot  put  value  into  anything  by  law/^ 
and  I  am  sorry  to  see  some  proclaim  this  who  know  by  rich  experience  how  easy 
it  is  for  the  Government  to  legislate  prices  up  or  down. 

VALUE  CREATED  BY  LAW. 

We  were  called  together  to  relieve  financial  distress  by  legislation.  Some  pro¬ 
pose  to  relieve  the  present  stringency  in  the  money  maiket  by  removing  the  tax 
on  national  bank  circulation  and  allowing  banks  to  issue  100  per  cent,  on  their 
bonds  instead  of  90  per  cent.  This  legislation  would  put  value  into  bank  stocks  by 
law,  because  it  would  add  to  the  profits  of  the  bank,  and  such  a  law  would 
probably  raise  the  market  price  of  bonds  by  increasing  the  demand  for  them.  I 
will  not  discuss  the  merits  of  this  proposition  now.  Let  those  who  favor  it  pre¬ 
pare  to  justify  themselves  before  their  constituents.  The  New  York  World  of 
August  3  contained  an  article  encouraging  the  banks  to  issue  more  money  under 
the  present  law.  It  showed  the  profits  as  follows : 

These  bonds  are  selling  now  at  109  to  110,  At  this  latter  period  a  $100,000  bond  transaction  would 
stand  as  follows : 

5100,000  U.  S.  4’s  at  110,  less  3^  per  cent,  accrued  interest,  $109,666  net,  would  cost . .  $109,666 


Less  circulation  issued  on  this  amount .  90,000 


Making  the  actual  cash  investment  only .  19,666 

On  Avhich  the  bank  would  receive  an  income  of  over  12%  per  cent.,  as  folloAvs : 

Interest  on  $100,000  4’s  per  annum„ .  $4,000 

Less  tax  1  per  cent,  on  circulation . . .  $900 

Less  sinking  fund  to  retire  premium  to  be  improved  at  6  per  cent .  464 

Less  expenses .  100 

-  1,464 


Net  income . . . . . . .  2,536 


Already  a  good  portion  of  these  bonds  held  in  reserve  are  coming  into  the  market  and  soon  find 
their  Avay  into  the  hands  of  national  hanks. 

If  the  proposed  law  is  adopted  $900  will  be  taken  from  the  expense  coltmn  by 
the  repeal  of  the  tax  on  circulation  and  $10,000  will.be  taken  from  the  cost  of  invest¬ 
ment,  so  that  the  profits  would  amount  to  $3,436  on  an  investment  of  $9,666,  or  more 
than  33  per  cent.  If,  however,  the  increased  demand  for  bonds  raised  the  premium 
to  15  per  cent.,  w^e  could  only  calculate  a  little  less  than  $3,436  on  an  investment 
of  $14,666,  or  nearly  25  per  cent.  This  they  would  probably  call  a  fair  divide. 
The  bondholder  would  receive  an  advantage  in  the  increased  premium  of,  say, 
$25,000,000,  and  the  national  bank  would  he  able  to  make  about  double  on  its  in¬ 
vestment  what  it  does  now.  If  the  premium  should  increase  more  tljan  5  per 
cent,  the  bondholder  would  make  more  and  the  hank  less.  If  the  premium  shculd 
not  increase  that  much  the  bondholder  would  make  less  and  the  bank  more. 

Let  those,  I  repeat,  who  favor  this  plan,  be  prepared  to  defend  it  before  a  con¬ 
stituency  composed  of  people  who  are  not  making  5  per  cent,  on  an  average  on 
the  money  invested  in  farms  or  enterprises,  and  let  those  who  will  profit  by  the  law 
cease  to  deny  the  ability  of  Government  to  increase  the  price  of  property  by  law. 
One  is  almost  moved  to  tears  by  the  sight  of  New  England  manufacturers  protest¬ 
ing  with  indignation  against  the  wisdcm  or  possibilitj'  of  giving  fictitious  value 
to  a  product,  when  for  the  last  thirty  years  they  have  drained  the  rest  of  the 
country  and  secured  artificial  prices  by  protective  tariff  laws.  [Applause.]  Seme 
of  our  Eastern  friends  accuse  the  advocates  of  free  coinage  of  favoring  repudiation. 

Repudiation  has  not  been  practiced  much  in  recent  years  by  the  debtor,  but  in 
1869  the  Credit  Strengthening  Act  enabled  the  bondholder  to  repudiate  a  con¬ 
tract  made  with  the  Government  and  to  demand  coin  in  payment  of  a  bond  fer 
which  he  had  given  paper  and  which  was  payable  in  lawful  money.  That  act  in¬ 
creasing  the  maiket  value  of  the  bonds  gave  a  profit  to  many  who  now  join  the 
^beneficiaries  of  the  act  assuming  the  District  debt  in  vociferous  proclamation  that 
■(the  Government  can  not  create  value.”  Does  not  the  location  of  a  public  build- 


13 


ing  add  to  the  value  of  adjacent  real  estate?  Do  not  towns  contest  the  location  of 
a  county  seat  because  of  the  advantage  it  brings?  Does  not  ihe  use  of  gold  and 
silver  as  money  increase  the  value  of  each  ounce  of  each  metal  ? 

PRECIOUS  METALS  LIMITED. 

These  are  called  precious  metals  because  the  production  is  limited  and  can  not 
be  increased  indefinitely  at  will.  If  this  Government  or  a  number  of  govern¬ 
ments  can  offer  a  market  unlimited  as  compared  with  the  supply,  the  bullion  value 
of  gold  and  silver  can  be  maintained  at  the  legal  ratio  The  moment  one  metal 
tends  to  cheapen, the  use  falls  on  it  and  increases  its  price,  while  the  decreased  de¬ 
mand  for  the  dearer  metal  retards  its  rise  and  thus  the  bullion  values  are  kept 
near  to  their  legal  ratio,  so  near  that  the  variation  can  cause  far  less  inconven¬ 
ience  and  injustice  than  the  variation  in  the  exchangeable  value  of  the  unit  would 
inflict  under  a  single  standard.  The  option  is  always  given  to  the  debtor  in  a 
double  standard. 

In  fact,  the  system  could  not  exist  if  the  option  remained  with  the  creditor,  for 
he  would  demand  the  dearer  metal  and  thus  increase  any  fluctuation  in  bulliDn 
values,  while  the  option  in  the  hands  of  the  debtor  reduces  the  fluctuation  to  the 
minimum.  That  the  unit  under  a  double  standard  is  more  stable  in  its  relation 
to  all  other  things  is  admitted  by  Jevons  and  proven  by  several  illutrations.  Mr» 
Giffen  tries  to  avoid  the  force  of  the  admission  by  saying  that  the  difierence  in 
favor  of  the  double  standard  is  only  in  the  proportion  of  2  to  1,  and  therefore  not 
sufficient  to  justify  its  adoption.  It  would  seem  that  where  stability  is  so  import¬ 
ant — and  it  never  was  so  important  as  to-day,  when  so  many  long-time  contracts 
are  executed — even  a  slight  difference  in  favor  of  the  double  standard  ought  to 
make  it  acceptable. 

We  established  a  bimetallic  standard  in  1792,  but  silver,  being  overvalued  by  our 
ratio  of  15  to  1,  stayed  with  us  and  gold  went  abroad,  where  mint  ratios  were  more 
favorable. 

THE  DOLLAR  OF  OUR  DADDIES. 

I  have  here  a  silver  ooin  [exhibiting  it]  which  came  from  the  mint  in  1795.  It 
has  upon  the  edge  these  signfficant  words:  “Hundred  Cents — One  Dollar  or 
Unit.”  It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  the  weight  of  the  gold  dollar  was  regulated 
by  the  silver  dollar,  and  the  gold  pieces  provided  for  made  multiples  of  it.  In  1834 
and  in  1837  the  alloy  was  changed  and  the  gold  dollar  reduced  in  size  in  order  to 
correspond  to  the  newly  established  ratio  of  16  to  1.  The  amount  of  pure  silver  in 
the  standard  dollar  has"  never  been  changed  since  its  adoption  in  1792. 

The  ratio 'of  16  to  1  overvalued  gold  and  our  silver  went  abroad.  The  eilver  dol¬ 
lar  was  worth  about  3  cents  more  than  the  gold  dollar,  because  it  could  be  coined 
in  France  at  the  ratio  of  15j  to  1.  Thus  during  all  the  period  prior  to  1873  this 
country  enjoyed  bimetallism  and,  although  at  one  time  we  used  one  metal  and  at 
another  time  another,  no  statesman  arose  to  demand  a  single  standard.  We  now 
have  three  kinds  of  bimetallists— those  who  favor  a  double  standard  only  by  inter¬ 
national  agreement,  those  who  favor  inde  pendent  action  at  a  changed  ratio,  and 
those  who  favor  independent  action  at  the  present  ratio.  Those  favoring  an  inter¬ 
national  agreement  might  be  again  divided  into  those  who  favor  an  agreement  by 
a  few  nations,  those  who  favor  an  agreement  by  many  nations,  and  those  who 
favor  it  only  on  condition  that  all  nations  wou'd  join. 

INTERNATIONAL  BIMETALLISM. 

I  suppose  it  would  hardly  be  proper  to  further  divide  them  into  those  who 
really  desire  an  international  agreement  and  those  who  utilize  the  possibility  of 
an  international  agreement  to  prevent  independent  action.  I  am  afraid  the 
agreement  will  not  be  brousjrht  about  by  those  who,  like  the  gentleman  from  Ooio 
[  Mr.  Harter],  are  willing  to  try  it,  but  have  no  faith  in  its  permanency  ;  nor  will  it 
receive  much  aid, I  fear, from  the  gentleman  from  New  York  [Mr.  Hendrix],  who 
said  on  last  Saturday  : 

I  predict  to  you  that  inside  of  three  months— before  this  Congress  meets  again— if  you  repeal 
this  Sherman '  law  and  adjourn,  England  will  make  proposals  to  this  country  to  come  into  a 
monetary  conference  and  see  what  can  be  done  for  the  sake  of  her  ward,  India. 


14 


Less  than  five  minutes  before  he  had  pierced  the  veil  of  the  future  with  pro¬ 
phetic  ken  and  declared: 

The  moving  finger  of  Time,  down  from  the  days  when  gold  started  in  the  race  for  first  place  to 
this  moment,  has  pointed  to  a  single  unit  of  value.  It  is  our  destiny.  It  will  triumph  in  this  Hall — 
perhaps  not  in  this  Congress  nor  in  your  day  ;  hut  it  is  going  to  become  the  financial  policy  of  this 
country  just  as  sure  as  to-morrow^  morning’s  sun  will  rise. 

Any  hope  of  bimetallism  there  ? 

What  is  the  prospect  for  the  establishment  of  international  bimetallism  ?  I 
would  be  glad  to  see  the  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  a  fixed  ratio 
among  the  nations,  but  how  is  such  an  agreement  to  be  secured?  The  gentleman 
from  Maryland  [Mr.  Rayner]  says  the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law; 
will  bring  England  to  terms.  Is  it  impossible  to  extract  a  lion^s  teeth  without 
putting  your  head  in  his  month  ?  Is  it  not  a  dangerous  experiment  to  join  Eng¬ 
land  in  a  single  standard  in  order  to  induce  her  to  join  us  in  a  double  standard  ? 
International  agreement  is  an  old  delusion  and  has  done  impdrtant  duty  ©n  many 
previous  occasions. 

WB  ARE  STILL  WAITING. 

The  opponents  of  the  Bland  law  in  1878  were  waiting  for  international  bimetallism . 
Mr.  Cleveland  mentioned  the  prospect  of  it  in  his  message  in  1885,  and  again  this 
year.  It  was  a  valuable  weapon  in  1890,  when  the  Sherman  bill  was  passed  and 
the  Biussels  conference  was  called  in  time  to  carry  us  over  the  last  Presidential 
election.  We  are  still  waiting,  and  those  are  waiting  most  patiently  who  favor  a  gold 
standard.  [Laughter  and  applause.]  Are  we  any  nearer  to  an  international 
agreement  than  we  were  fifteen  years  ago  ?  The  European  nations  wait  on  Eng¬ 
land,  and  she  refused  within  a  year  to  even  consider  the  adoption  of  the  double 
standard.  Can  we  conquer  her  by  waiting?  We  have  tried  the  Fabian  policy. 

BOND  OR  FEES. 

Suppose  we  try  bringing  her  to  terms  by  action.  Le*;  me  appeal  to  your  patriot¬ 
ism.  Shall  we  make  our  laws  dependent  upon  England’s  action  and  thus  allow 
her  to  legislate  for  us  upon  the  most  important  of  all  questions  ?  Shall  we  confess 
our  inability  to  enact  monetary  laws?  Are  we  an  English  colony  or  an  inde¬ 
pendent  people?  If  the  use  of  gold  alone  is  to  make  us  slaves,  let  us  use  both 
metals  and  be  free.  If  there  be  some  living  along  the  eastern  coast — belter 
acquainted  with  the  beauties  of  the  Alps  than  with  the  grandeur  of  the  Rockies, 
more  accustomed  to  the  sunny  skies  of  Italy  than  to  the  invigorating  breezes  of  the 
Mississippi  Valley — who  are  not  willing  to  trust  their  fortunes  and  their  destinies 
to  Ameiican  citizens,  let  them  learn  that  the  people  living  between  the  Allegha- 
nies  to  the  Golden  Gate  are  not  afraid  to  cast  their  all  upon  the  Republic  and  rise 
or  fall  with  it.  [Loud  Applase.] 

One  hundred  and  seventeen  years  ago  the  liberty  bell  gave  notice  to  a  waiting  and 
expectant  people  that  independence  had  been  declared.  There  may  be  doubting, 
trembling  ones  among  us  now,  but,  sirs,  I  do  not  overestimate  it  when  I  say  that 
out  of  twelve  millions  of  voters,  more  than  ten  millions  are  waiting,  anxiously 
waiting,  for  the  signal  which  shall  announce  the  financial  independence  of  the 
United  States,  [Applause.]  This  Congress  cannot  more  surely  win  the  approval 
of  a  grateful  people  than  by  declaring  that  this  nation,  the  grandest  which 
the  world  has  ever  seen,  has  the  right  and  the  ability  to  legislate  for  its  own 
people  on  every  subject,  regardless  of  the  wishes,  the  intreaties,  or  the  threats  of 

foreign  powers.  [Applause.] 

1. 

WHAT  SHALL  THE  RATIO  BE? 

Perhaps  the  most  important  question  for  us  to  consider  is  the  question  of  ratio. 
Comparatively  few  people  in  this  coun  rv  t^re  in  favor  of  a  gold  standard,  and  no 
national  party  has  ever  advocated  it.  Comparatively  few,  also,  will  be  deceived 
by  the  promise  of  international  bimetallism  annually  held  out  to  us.  Among  those 


15 


m  favor  of  bimetallism,  and  in  favor  of  independent  action  on  the  part  of  the 
United  States,  there  is,  however,  an  honest  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  particular 
ratio  at  which  the  ualimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  should  be  undertaken. 
The  principle  of  bimetallism  does  not  stand  upon  any  certain  ratio,  and  may  exist 
at  1  to  30  as  well  as  at  1  to  16. 

In  fixing  the  ratio  we  should  select  that  one  which  will  secure  the  greatest 
advantage  to  the  public  and  cause  the  least  injustice.  The  present  ratio,  in  my 
judgment,  should  be  adopted.  A  change  in  the  ratio  could  be  made  (as  in  1834) 
by  reducing  the  size  of  the  gold  dollar  or  by  increasing  the  size  of  the  silver  dollar, 
or  by  making  a  change  in  the  weight  of  both  dollars.  A  larger  silver  dollar  would 
help  the  creditor.  A  smaller  gold  dollar  would  help  the  debtor.  It  is  not  just  to 
do  either,  but  if  a  change  must  be  made  the  benefit  should  be  given  to  the  debtor 
rather  than  to  the  creditor. 

Let  no  one  accuse  me  of  defending  the  justness  of  any  change;  but  I  repeat  it, 
if  we  are  given  a  choice  between  a  change  which  will  aid  the  debtor  by  reducing 
the  size  of  his  debt  and  a  change  which  will  aid  the  creditor  by  increasing  the 
amount  which  he  is  to  receive,  either  by  increasing  the  number  of  his  dollars  or 
their  size,  the  advantage  must  be  given  to  the  debtor,  and  no  man  during  this 
debate,  whatever  may  be  his  private  wish  or  interest,  will  advocate  the  giving  of 
the  advantage  to  the  creditor. 

[A  CHANGE  OF  EATIO  UNFOETUNATE. 

To  illustrate  the  effect  of  changing  the  ratio  let  us  take,  for  convenience,  the 
ratio  of  24  to  1,  as  advocated  by  some.  We  could  make  this  change  by  reducing 
the  weight  of  the  gold  dollar  one-third.  This  would  give  to  the  holders  of  gold  an 
advantage  of  some  $200,000,000,  but  the  creditors  would  lose  several  billions  of 
dollars  in  the  actual  value  of  their  debts.  A  debt  contracted  before  1873  would 
not  be  scaled,  because  the  new  gold  dollar  would  purchase  as  much  as  the  old  gold 
dollar  would  in  1873.  Creditors,  however,  whose  loans  have  been  ma-le  since  that 
time  would  suffer,  and  the  most  recent  loans  would  show  the  greatest  loss.  The 
value  of  silver  bullion  has  only  fallen  in  relation  to  gold.  But  the  purchasing 
power  of  one  ounce  of  silver  has  varied  less  since  1873  than  has  the  purchasing 
power  of  one  ounce  of  gold,  which  would  indicate  that  gold  had  risen. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  ratio  is  changed  by  increasing  the  size  of  the  silver 
dollar.  It  would  be  necessary  to  recoin  our  silver  dollars  into  dollars  a  half  larger,  or 
we  would  have  in  circulation  two  legal  tender  silver  dollars  of  different  sizes.  Of 
the  two  plans  it  would  be  better,  in  my  judgment,  to  keep  both  dollars  in  circula¬ 
tion  together,  though  unequal  in  weight,  rather  than  to  recoin  the  lighter  dollars. 
The  recoinage  of  more  than  500,000,000  of  silver  dollars,  or  the  bullion  represent¬ 
ing  them,  would  cause  a  shrinkage  of  about  $170,000,000,  or  one-third  of  our  silver 
money;  it  would  cause  a  shrinkage  of  nearly  one-sixth  of  our  metallic  money 
and  of  more  than  one-tenth  of  our  total  circulation.  This  contraction  would 
increase  our  debts  more  than  a  billion  dollars  and  decrease  the  nominal  value  of 
our  property  more  than  five  billions. 

A  change  in  the  ratio  made  by  increasing  the  size  of  the  silver  dollar  as  above 
suggested  would  also  decrease  by  one-third  the  number  of  dollars  which  could  be 
coined  from  the  annual  product  of  silver.  If,  as  Mr.  Carlisle  has  said,  the  supply 
of  metal,  both  gold  and  silver,  is  none  too  large  to  keep  pace  with  population,  the 
increase  in  the  weight  of  each  dollor  would  make  the  supply  to  that  extent 
deficient.  A  change  in  ratio,  whether  secured  by  decreasing  the  gold  dollar  or  by 
increasing  the  silver  dollar,  would  probably  make  an  international  agreement 
more  difficult,  because  nearly  all  of  the  silver  coin  now  in  existence  circulates  at 
a  ratio  less  than  ours 

it  ihb  cliange  should  be  made  in  this  country  by  increasing  the  size  of  rhe  silver 
dollar  and  an  international  agreement  secured  upon  the  new  ratio,  to  be  eflTected 
by  other  nations  in  the  same  way,  the  amount  of  money  in  the  world,  that  is 
metallic  money,  would  suffer  a  contraction  of  more  than  $1,000,000,000,  to  the 
enormous  injury  of  the  debtor  class  and  to  the  enormous  advantage  of  the  creditor 
class.  If  we  believe  that  the  value  of  gold  has  risen  because  its  supply  has  not 


16 


increased  as  fast  as  the  demand  caused  by  favorable  legislation,  then  it  would  be 
unfair  to  continue  this  appreciation  by  other  legislation  favorable  to  gold.  It 
would  be  a  special  injustice  to  the  mine  owner  and  to  the  farmer,  whose  products 
have  fallen  with  silver,  to  make  perpetual  the  injunction  against  their  prosperity. 

WHO  IS  UNSELFISH  ? 

We  often  hear  our  opponents  complain  of  the  “cupidity  of  the  mine  owner.” 
Let  us  admit  that  the  mine  owner  is  selfish,  and  that  he  will  profit  by  the  increased 
price  of  silver  bullion.  Let  us,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  go  further,  and  accuse 
him  of  favoring  the  free  coinage  of  silver  solely  for  the  purpose  of  increasing  the 
price  of  his  product.  Does  that  make  him  worse  than  other  men  ?  Is  not  the 
farmer  selfish  enough  to  desire  a  higher  price  for  wheat?  Is  not  the  cotton- 
grower  selfish  enough  to  desire  a  higher  price  for  his  cotton  ?  Is  not  the  laboring 
man  selfish  enough  to  desire  higher  wages  ?  And,  if  I  may  be  pardoned  for  the 
boldness,  are  not  bankers  and  business  men  selfish  enough  to  ask  for  legislation 
at  our  hands  which  will  give  them  prosperity?  Was  not  this  extraordinary 
session  called  in  order  to  bring  back  prosperity  to  our  business  men  ? 

Is  it  any  more  importantant  that  you  should  keep  a  merc^intile  house  from 
failing  than  that  you  should  keep  a  mine  from  suspending?  Are  those  who 
desire  free  coinage  of  silver  in  order  that  the  barren  wastes  should  be  made  to 
“blossom  like  the  rose”  any  worse  than  those  who  want  the  Sherman  law  repealed 
in  order  to  borrow  foreign  gold  and  retire  clearing  house  certificates  ?  There  is  a 
class  of  people  whose  interest  in  financial  legislation  is  too  often  overlooked.  The 
money-loaner  has  just  as  much  interest  in  the  rise  in  the  value  of  his  product — 
money — ^as  farmers  and  miners  have  in  the  increased  price  of  their  products. 

The  man  who  has  |10,000  in  money  becomes  worth  |20,000  in  reality  when 
prices  fall  one-half.  Shall  we  assume  that  the  money-lenders  of  this  and  other 
countries  ignore  the  advantage  which  an  appreciated  currency  gives  to  them  and 
desire  it  simply  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor  man  and  the  laborer?  What  refining 
influence  is  there  in  their  business  which  purges  away  the  dross  of  selfishness  and 
makes  pure  and  patriotic  only  their  motives?  [Laughter.]  Has  some  new  dis¬ 
pensation  reversed  the  parable  and  left  Lazarus  in  torment  while  Dives  is  borne 
aloft  in  Abraham’s  bosom  ?  [Laughter.] 

THE  miner’s  just  CCMPLAINT. 

But  is  the  silver  miner  after  all  so  selfish  as  to  be  worthy  of  censure  ?  Does  he 
ask  for  some  new  legislation  or  for  some  innovation  inaugurated  in  his  behalf?  No. 
He  pleads  only  for  the  restoration  of  the  money  of  the  fathers.  He  asks  to'  have 
liven  back  to  him  a  right  which  he  enjoyed  from  1792  to  1873.  During  all  those 
/ears  he  could  deposit  his  silver  bullion  at  the  mints  and  receive  full  legal-tender 
joins  at  the  rate  of  of  11.29  for  each  ounce  of  silver,  and  during  a  part  of  the  time 
lis  product  could  be  converted  into  money  at  even  a  higher  price.  Free  coinage 
call  only  give  back  to  him  what  demonetization  took  away.  He  does  not  ask  for 
a  silver  dollar  redeemable  in  a  gold  dollar,  but  for  a  silver  dollar  which  redeems 
itself. 

If  the  bullion  value  of  silver  has  not  been  reduced  by  hostile  legislation,  the 
free  coinage  of  silver  at  the  present  ratio  can  bring  to  the  mine  owner  no  benefit, 
except  by  enabling  him  to  pay  a  debt  already  contracted  with  less  ounces  of  silver. 
If  the  price  of  his  product  has  been  reduced  by  hostile  legislation,  is  he  asking 
any  more  than  we  would  ask  under  the  same  circumstances  in  seeking  to  remove 
the  oppressive  hand  of  the  law  ?  Let  me  suggest,  too,  that  those  who  favor  an 
international  agreement  are  estopped  from  objecting  to  the  profits  of  the  silver 
mine  owner,  because  an  international  agreement  could  only  be  efiected  at  some 
ratio  near  to  ours,  propably  15 J  to  1,  and  this  would  just  as  surely  inure  to  the 
benefit  of  the  owner  of  silver  as  would  free  coinage  established  by  the  indepen¬ 
dent  action  of  this  country. 

If  our  opponents  were  correct  in  asserting  that  the  price  of  silver  bullion  could 
be  maintained  at  129  cents  an  ounce  by  international  agreement,  but  not  by  our 


>4 


17 


separate  action,  then  international  bimetallism  would  bring  a  larger  profit  to  the 
mine  owner  than  the  free  coinage  of  silver  by  this  country  could.  Let  the  inter¬ 
national  bimetallist,  then,  find  some  better  objection  to  free  coinage  than  that 
based  on  the  mine  owner’s  profit. 

THE  PROFITS  OF  MINING. 

But  what  is  the  mine  owner’s  profit?  Has  anyone  told  you  the  average  cost  of 
mining  an  ounce  of  silver  ?  You  have  heard  of  some  particular  mine  where 
fcilver  can  be  produced  at  a  low  cost,  but  no  one  has  attempted  to  gi^^e  you  any 
reliable  data  as  to  the  average  cost  of  production.  I  had  a  letter  from  Mr.  Leech 
when  he  was  Director  of  the  Mint,  saying  that  the  Government  is  in  possession  of 
no  data  in  regard  to  the  cost  of  gold  production  and  none  of  any  value  in  regard 
to  silver.  No  calculation  can  be  made  as  to  the  profits  of  mining  which  does  not 
include  money  spent  in  prospecting  and  in  mines  which  have  ceased  to  pay,  as 
well  as  these  which  are  profitably  worked. 

When  we  see  a  wheel  of  fortune  with  twenty-four  paddles,  see  those  paddles 
sold  for  10  cents  apiece,  and  see  the  holder  of  the  winning  paddle  draw  $2,  we  do 
not  conclude  that  money  can  be  profitably  invested  in  a  wheel  of  fortune.  We 
know  that  those  who  bought  expended  altogether  $2.40  on  the  turn  of  the 
wheel,  and  that  the  man  who  won  only  received  ^2 ;  but  our  opponents  insist  upon 
estimating  the  profits  of  silver  mining  by  the  cost  of  the  winning  paddle.  It  is 
safe  to  say  that  taking  the  gold  and  silver  of  the  world — and  it  is  more  true  ot 
silver  than  of  gold — every  dollar’s  worth  of  metal  has  cost  a  dollar.  It  is  strange 
that  those  who  watch  so  carefully  less  the  silver  miner  shall  receive  more  for  his 
product  than  the  bare  cost  of  production  ignore  the  more  fortunate  gold  miner. 

Did  you  ever  hear  a  monometalist  complain  because  a  man  could  produce  25.8 
grains  of  gold,  .9  fine,  at  any  price  whatever,  and  yet  take  it  to  our  mint  and  have 
it  stamped  into  a  dollar  with  full  l^gal  tender  qualities?  I  saw  at  the  World’s 
Fair  a  few  days  ago  a  nugget  of  gold,  just  as  it  was  found,  worth  over  $3,000.  What 
an  outrage  that  the  finder  should  be  allowed  to  convert  that  into  money  at  such  an 
enormous  profit!  And  yet  no  advocate  of  honest  money  raises  his  hand  to  stop 
that  crime. 

VALUE  NOT  DEPENDENT  ON  COST. 

The  fact  is  that  the  price  of  gold  and  silver  does  not  depend  upon  the  cost  of  pro¬ 
duction,  but  upon  the  law  of  supply  and  demand.  [Applause.]  It  is  true  that 
production  will  stop  when  either  metal  cannot  be  produced  at  a  profit ;  but  so 
long  as  the  demand  continues  equal  to  the  supply  the  value  of  an  ounce  of  either 
metal  may  be  far  above  the  cost  of  production.  With  most  kinds  of  property  a 
rise  in  price  will  cause  increased  production ;  for  instance,  if  the  price  of  wheat 
rises  faster  than  the  price  of  other  things,  there  will  be  a  tendency  to  increased 
production  until  the  price  falls ;  but  this  tendency  cannot  be  carried  out  in  the 
case  of  tne  precious  metals,  because  the  metal  must  be  found  before  it  can  be  pro¬ 
duced,  and  finding  is  uncertain. 

Between  18C0  and  1849  an  ounce  of  gold  or  silver  would  exchange  for  more  of 
other  things  than  it  would  from  1849  to  1873,  yet  during  the  latter  period  the 
production  of  both  gold  and  silver  greatly  increased.  It  will  be  said  that  the  pur¬ 
chasing  power  of  an  ounce  of  metal  fell  because  of  the  increased  supply ;  but  that 
fall  did  not  check  production,  nor  has  the  rise  in  the  purchasing  power  of  an 
ounce  of  gold  since  1873  increased  the  production.  The  production  of  both  gold 
and  silver  is  controlled  so  largely  by  chance  as  to  make  some  of  the  laws  appli¬ 
cable  to  other  property  inapplicable  to  the  precious  metals.  If  the  supply  of  gold 
decreases  without  any  diminution  of  the  demand  the  exchangeable  value  of  each 
ounce  of  gold  is  bound  to  increase,  although  the  cost  of  producing  the  gold  may  con¬ 
tinue  to  mil. 

Why  do  not  the  advocates  of  gold  monometallism  recognize  and  complain  of  the 
advantage  given  to  gold  by  laws  which  increase  the  demand  for  it  and,  therefore,  the 
value  of  each  ounce?  Instead  of  that  they  confine  themselves  to  the  denuncia- 


18 


tion  of  the  silver-mine  owner.  I  have  never  advocated  the  use  of  either  gojd  or 
silver  as  the  means  of  giving  emplojrment  to  miners,  nor  has  the  defence  of 
bimetallism  been  conducted  by  those  interested  in  the  production  of  silver.  We 
favor  the  use  of  goid  and  silver  as  money  because  money  is  a  necessity  and 
because  these  metals,  owing  to  special  fitness,  have  been  used  from  time  imme¬ 
morial-  The  entire  annual  supply  of  both  metals,  coined  at  the  present  ratio,  does 
not  afford  too  large  a  sum  of  money. 

THE  ARNUAL  INCREASE  OF  SILVER. 

If,  as  is  estimated,  two-thirds  of  the  $130,000,000  of  gold  produced  annually  are 
consumed  in  the  arts,  only  $46,000,000 — or  less  than  we  need  for  this  country  alone — 
are  left  for  coinage.  If  one-sixth  of  the  $186,000,000  of  silver  produced  annually 
is  used  in  the  arts,  $155,000,000  are  left  for  coinage.  India  has  been  in  the  habit  of 
taking  about  one-third  of  that  sum.  Thus  the  total  amount  of  gold  and  silver 
annually  available  for  all  the  people  of  all  the  world  is  only  about  $200,000,000,  or 
about  four  times  what  we  need  in  this  country  to  keep  pace  with  increasing  popu¬ 
lation.  And  as  population  increases  the  annual  addition  to  the  money  must  also 
increase. 

The  total  sum  of  metallic  money  is  a  little  less  than  $8,000,000,000,  The  $200,- 
000,000  per  annum  is  about  two-and-a-half  per  cent,  on  the  total  volume  of  metallic 
money,  taking  no  account  of  lost  coins  and  shrinkage  by  abrasion.  To  quote 
again  the  language  of  Mr.  Carlisle. 

Mankind  will  be  fortunate  indeed  if  the  ann\ial  production  of  gold  coin  shall  keep  pace  with  the 
annual  increase  of  population,  commerce  and  industry. 

An  increase  of  the  silver  dollar  one- third  by  an  international  agreement  would 
reduce  by  50,000,000  the  number  of  dollars  which  could  be  coined  from  the 
annual  product  of  silver,  which  would  amount  to  a  decrease  of  about  one-fourth 
of  the  entire  increase  of  metallic  money,  while  the  abandonment  of  silver 
entirely  would  destroy  three-quarters  of  the  annual  increase  in  metallic  money,  or  J' 

possibly  all  of  it,  if  we  take  into  consideration  the  reduction  of  the  gold  supply 
hy  the  closing  of  gold-producing  silver  mines. 

Thus  it  is  almost  certain  that  without  silver  the  sum  of  metallic  money  would  ^ 

remain  stationary,  if  not  actually  decrease,  from  year  to  year,  while  population 
increases  and  new  enterprises  demand,  from  time,  to  time  a  larger  sum  of  currency. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  the  money  question  is  broader  than  the  interest  of  a  few 
mine  owners.  It  touches  every  man,  woman,  and  child  in  all  the  world,  and 
affects  those  in  every  condition  of  life  and  society.  ^ 

INCIDENTAL  BENEFITS. 

The  interest  of  the  mine  owner  is  incidental.  He  profits  by  the  use  of  silver  as 
money  just  as  the  gold  miner  profits  by  the  use  of  gold  as  money;  just  as  the  news¬ 
paper  profits  by  the  law  compelling  the  advertising  of  foreclosures;  just  as  the  sea¬ 
port  profits  by  the  deepening  of  its  harbor ;  just  as  the  horse  seller  would  profit  by 
a  war  which  required  the  purchase  of  a  large  number  of  horses  for  cavalry  service, 
or  just  as  the  undertaker  would  profit  by  the  decent  burial  of  a  pauper  at  public 
expense. 

All  of  these  receive  an  incidental  benefit  from  public  acts.  Shall  we  complain  if 
the  use  of  gold  and  silver  as  money  gives  employment  to  men,  builds  up  cities  and 
fills  our  mountains  with  life  and  industry?  Shall  we  oppress  all  debtors  and 
derange  all  business  agreements  in  order  to  prevent  the  producers  of  money  metals 
from  obtaining  for  them  more  than  actual  cost?  We  do  not  reason  that  way  in 
other  things;  why  suppress  the  reason  in  this  matter  because  of  cultivated  preju¬ 
dices  against  the  white  metal  ?  But  what  interest  has  the  farmer  in  this  subject, 
you  may  ask.  The  same  that  every  laboring  man  has  in  a  currency  sufficient  to 
carry  on  the  commerce  and  business  of  a  country.  The  employer  canuoi  give  work 
to  men  unless  he  can  carry  on  the  business  at  a  profit,  and  he  is  hampered  and 
embarrassed  by  a  currency  which  appreciates  because  of  its  insufficiency. 


/ 


19 


THE  farmer’s  interest. 

The  farmer  labors  under  a  double  disadvantage.  He  not  only  suffers  as  a  pro¬ 
ducer  from  all  those  causes  which  reduce  the  price  of  property,  but  he  is  thrown 
into  competition  with  the  products  of  India.  Without  Indian  competition  his  lot 
would  be  hard  enough,  for  if  he  is  a  land  owner  he  finds  his  capital  decreasing 
with  an  appreciating  standard,  and  if  he  owes  on  the  land  he  finds  his  equity  of 
redemption  extinguished.  The  last  census  shows  a  real  estate  mortgage  indebted¬ 
ness  in  the  five  great  agricultural  States — Illinois,  Iowa,  Missouri,  Kansas,  and 
Nebraska — of  more  than  one  billion  of  dollars.  A  rising  standard  means  a  great 
deal  of  distress  to  these  mortgagors.  But  as  I  said,  the  producers  of  wheat  and 
cotton  have  a  special  grievance,  for  the  prices  of  those  articles  are  governed 
largely  by  the  prices  in  Liverpool,  and  as  silver  goes  down  our  prices  fall,  while 
the  rupee  price  remains  the  same.  I  quote  from  the  agricultural  report  of  1890, 
page  8: 

The  recent  legislation  looking  to  the  restoration  oi  the  bimetallic  standard  of  our  currency,  and 
the  consequent  enhancement  of  the  value  of  silver,  has  unquestionably  had  much  to  do  with  the 
recent  advance  in  the  price  of  cereals.  The  same  cause  has  advanced  the  price  of  wheat  in  Russia 
and  India,  and  in  the  same  degree  reduced  their  power  of  competition.  English  gold  was  formerly 
exchanged  for  cheap  silver  and  wheat  purchased  with  the  cheaper  metal  was  sold  in  Great  Britain 
for  gold.  Much  of  this  advantage  is  lost  by  the  appreciation  of  silver  in  those  countries.  It  ia 
reasonable,  therefore,  to  expect  much  higher  prices  for  wheat  than  have  been  received  ia 
recent  years. 

% 

Mr.  Rusk’s  reasoning  is  correct.  Shall  we  by  changing  the  ratio  fix  the  price  of 
wheat  and  cotton  at  the  present  low  price  ?  If  it  is  possible  to  do  so  it  is  no  more 
than  fair  that  we  restore  silver  to  its  former  place,  and  thus  give  back  to  the 
farmer  some  of  his  lost  prosperity.  Can  silver  be  maintained  on  a  parity  with  gold 
at  the  present  ratio?  It  has  been  shown  that  if  we  should  fail  and  our  efibrt 
should  result  in  a  single  silver  standard  it  wouid  be  better  for  us  than  the  adop¬ 
tion  of  the  gold  standard — that  is,  that  the  w  orst  toat  could  come  fiom  the  attempt 
would  be  far  better  than  the  best  that  our  opponents  could  offer  us. 

>s. 

PREStNT  RATIO  BEST. 

It  has  been  shown  that  dangers  and  disadvantages  attend  a  change  of  ratio.  It 
may  now  be  added  that  no  change  in  the  ratio  can  be  made  with  fairness  or  intel¬ 
ligence  without  first  putting  gold  and  silver  upon  a  perfect  equality  in  order  to  tell 
what  the  natural  ratio  is.  If  a  new  ratio  is  necessary,  who  can  tell  just  what  that 
ratio  ought  to  be?  Who  knows  to  what  extent  the  divergence  between  gold  and 
silver  is  due  to  natural  laws  and  to  what  extent  it  is  due  to  artificial  laws?  We 
know  that  the  mere  act  of  India  in  suspending  free  coinage,  although  she  con¬ 
tinues  to  buy  and  coin  on  government  account,  reduced  the  price  of  silver  more 
than  10  cents  per  ounce.  Can  anyone  doubt  that  the  restoration  of  free  coinage  in 
that  country  would  increase  the  bullion  price  of  silver  ?  Who  doubts  that  the  free 
coinage  of  silver  by  the  United  States  would  increase  its  bullion  price  ? 

The  onl^  question  is  how  much.  Is  it  only  a  guess,  for  no  one  can  state  with 
mathematical  precision  what  the  rise  would  be.  The  full  use  of  silver,  too,  would 
stop  the  increased  demand  for  gold,  and  thus  prevent  any  further  rise  in  its  price. 
It  is  because  no  one  can  speak  with  certainty  that  I  insist  that  no  change  in  the 
ratio  can  be  intelligently  made  until  noth  metals  are  offered  equal  privileges  at 
the  mint.  When  we  have  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the 
present  ratio,  then,  and  then  only,  can  we  tell  whether  any  of  the  apparent  fall  in 
the  bullion  price  of  silver  is  due  to  circumstances  over  which  we  have  no  control, 
and  if  so,  how  much  ?  If  this  experiment  should  demonstrate  the  necessity  for  a 
change  of  ratio  it  can  be  easily  made,  and  should  be  made  in  such  a  way  as  to 
cause  the  least  injury  to  society.  But  we  can,  in  my  judgment,  maintain  the 
parity  at  the  present  ratio.  I  state  this  without  hesitation,  notwithstanding  the 
fact  that  our  opponents  do  not  disguise  the  contempt  which  they  feel  for  one  who 
can  believe  this  possible.  If  the  past  tf  aches  anything  it  teaches  the  possibility 
of  this  country  maintaining  the  parity  alone.  The  Royal  Commission  of  England 
stated  in  its  report  that  France  did  maintain  the  parity  at  ISi  to  1,  although  she 


20 


has  not  half  our  population  or  enterprise.  During  the  years  when  her  mint  laws 
controlled  the  price  of  gold  and  silver  bullion  the  changes  in  the  relative  produc¬ 
tion  of  gold  and  silver  were  greater  than  they  have  been  since.  At  one  time 
before  1873  the  value  of  the  silver  product  was  related  to  the  value  of  the  gold 
product  as  3  to  1,  while  at  another  time  the  relation  was  reversed,  and  the  produc¬ 
tion  of  gold  to  silver  was  as  3  to  1. 

No  such  changes  have  occurred  since ;  and  the  present  value  of  the  silver  product 
is  only  1^  to  1  of  gold.  Much  of  the  prejudice  against  silver  is  due  to  the  fact  that 
it  has  been  falling  as  compared  to  gold.  Let  it  begin  to  rise  and  it  will  become 
more  acceptable  as  a  money  metal.  Goschen,  at  the  Paris  Conference,  very  aptly 
stated  the  condition  when  he  said : 

At  present  there  is  a  \aciom  circle.  States  are  afraid  of  employing  silver  on  acoormt  of  the  depre¬ 
ciation,  and  the  depreciation  continues  because  States  refuse  to  employ  it. 

Let  that  “vicious  circle”  be  broken  and  silver  wdl  resume  its  rightful  place. 
We  believe,  in  other  words,  that  the  opening  of  our  mints  to  the  free  and  unlimited 
coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  16  to  1  would  immediately  result  in  restoring  silver 
to  the  coinage  value  of  $1.29  per  ounce,  not  only  here,  but  everywhere.  That 
there  could  b^e  no  difference  between  the  dollar  coined  and  the  same  weight  of 
silver  uncoined,  when  one  could  be  exchanged  for  the  other,  needs  no  argument. 

We  do  not  believe  that  the  gold  dollar  would  go  to  a  premium,  because  it  could 
not  find  a  better  coinage  ratio  elsewhere,  and  l^cause  it  cou-1.1  be  put  to  no  pur¬ 
pose  for  which  a  silver  dollar  would  not  be  as  good.  If  our  ratio  were  1  to  14  our 
gold  would,  of  course,  be  exchanged  for  silver;  but  with  our  ratio  of  16  to  1  gold 
is  worth  more  here  than  abroad,  and  foreign  silver  would  not  come  here,  because 
it  is  circulating  at  home  at  a  better  ratio  than  we  offer. 

NO  DANGER  FROM  FOREIGN  COIN. 

We  need  not  concern  ourselves,  therefore,  about  the  coin  silver.  All  that  we 
have  to  take  care  of  is  the  annual  product  from  the  mines,  about  40  per  cent,  of 
which  is  produced  in  this  country.  Under  the  Sherman  law  we  furnish  a  market 
for  about  one-third  of  the  world’s  annual  product.  I  believe  about  one-sixth  is 
used  in  the  arts,  which  would  leave  about  one- half  for  all  the  rest  of  the  world. 
India  has  suspended  free  coinage  temporarily,  in  anticipation  of  the  repeal  of  the 
Sherman  law.  The  Herschell  report  expressly  states  that  the  action  was  neces¬ 
sary,  because  no  agreement  with  the  United  States  could  be  secured.  The 
language  is  as  follows  : 

In  a  dispatch  of  the  Slst  of  June,  1S92,  the  government  of  India  expressed  the  deliberate  opinion 
that,  if  it  became  clear  that  the  Brussels  conference  was  unlikely  to  arrive  at  a  satisfactory  con¬ 
clusion,  and  if  a  direct  a.greement  between  India  and  the  United  States  were  found  to  be  unattainable, 
the  government  of  India  should  at  once  close  their  mints  to  the  free  coinage  of  silver  and  make 
arrangements  tor  the  introduction  of  a  gold  standard. 

There  is  no  doubt  of  the  restoration  of  free  coinage  in  India  if  this  Government 
takes  the  lead,  and  with  India  taking  the  usual  amount,  but'  oue-sixth  of  the 
annual  supply  if  left  for  the  other  silver-using  countries.  There  can  be  no  flood 
of  silver,  nor  will  prices  rise  to  any  considerable  extent — except  the  price  of 
silver  itself  and  a  few  of  the  staple  products  of  agriculture  which  have  fallen  with 
silver  because  of  India’s  competition.  General  prices  cannot  rise  unless  the  total 
number  of  dollars  increases  more  rapidly  than  the  need  for  dollars,  which  has 
been  shown  to  be  impossible.  The  danger  is,  that  taking  all  the  gold  and  all  the 
silver,  we  will  not  have  enough  money,  and  that  there  will  still  be  some  apprecia¬ 
tion  in  the  standard  of  value. 

To  rec.apitulate,  then,  there  is  not  enough  of  either  metal  to  form  the  basis  for 
the  world’s  metallic  money ;  both  metals  must  therefore  be  used  as  full  legal 
tender  primary  money.  There  is  not  enough  of  both  metals  to  more  than  k«ep 
pace  with  the  increased  demand  for  money ;  silver  cannot  be  retained  in  circula¬ 
tion  as  a  part  of  the  woild’s  money  if  the  IJnited  States  abandons  it-  This  nation 
must,  therefore,  either  retain  the  present  law  or  make  some  further  provision  for 
silver.  The  only  rational  plan  is  to  use  both  gold  and  silver  at  some  ratio  with 


equal  privileges  at  the  Mint.  No  change  in  the  ratio  can  be  made  inteliigertly 
until  both  metals  are  put  on  an  equality  at  the  present  ratio.  The  present  ratio 
should  be  adopted  if  the  parity  can  be  maintained ;  and^  lastly,  it  can  be. 

THE  SHERMAN  LAW. 

If  these  conclusions  are  correct  what  must  be  our  action  on  the  bill  to  uncondi* 
tionally  repeal  the  Sherman  law?  The  Sherman  law  has  a  serious  defect;  it 
treats  silver  as  a  commodity  rather  than  as  a  money,  and  thus  discriminates  be¬ 
tween  silver  and  gold.  The  Sherman  law  was  passed  in  1890  as  a  substitute  for 
what  was  known  as  the  Bland  law.  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  Bland  law 
was  forced  upon  the  silver  men  as  a  compromise,  and  that  the  opponents  of  silver 
sought  its  repeal  from  the  day  it  was  passed.  It  will  also  be  remembered  that 
the  Sherman  law  was  in  like  manner  forced  upon  the  silver  men  as  a  compromise, 
and  that  the  opponents  of  silver  have  sought  its  repeal  ever  since  it  became  a  law. 
The  law  provides  for  the  compulsory  purchase  of  54,000,000  ounces  of  silver  per 
year,  and  for  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes  thereon  at  the  gold  value  of  the  bullion. 

These  notes  are  a  legal  tender  and  are  redeemable  in  gold  or  silver  at  the  op¬ 
tion  of  the  Government.  There  is  also  a  clause  in  the  law  which  state*  that  it  is 
the  policy  of  this  Government  to  maintain  the  parity  between  the  metals.  The 
Administration,  it  seems,  has  decided  that  the  parity  can  only  be  maintained  by 
violating  a  part  of  the  law  and  giving  the  option  to  the  holder  instead  of  to  the 
Government.  Without  discussing  the  administration  of  the  law  let  us  consider 
the  charges  made  against  it. 

FALSE  ALARM. 

The  main  objection  which  we  heard  last  spring  was  that  the  Treasury  notes 
were  used  to  draw  gold  out  of  the  Treasury.  If  that  objection  were  a  material  one 
the  bill  might  easily  be  amended  so  as  to  make  the  Treasury  notes  hereafter  is¬ 
sued  redeemable  only  in  silver,  like  the  silver  certificates  issued  under  the  Bland 
law-  But  the  objection  is  scarcely  important  enough  for  consideration.  While 
the  Treasury  notes  have  been  used  to  draw  out  gold,  they  need  not  hare  been 
used  for  that  purpose,  for  we  have  $346,000,000  worth  of  greenbacks  with  which 
gold  can  be  drawn,  so  long  as  the  Government  gives  the  option  to  the  holder.  If 
all  of  the  Treasury  notes  were  destroyed  the  greenbacks  are  sufficient  to  draw  out 
the  $100,000,000  reserve  three  times  over,  and  then  they  can  be  reiaiued  and  used 
again.  To  complain  of  the  Treasury  notes  while  the  greenbacks  remain  is  like 
finding  fault  because  the  gate  is  open  when  the  whole  fence  is  down,  and  reminds 
me  of  the  man  who  made  a  box  for  his  feline  family,  and  cut  a  big  whole  for  the 
cat  to  go  in  at  and  a  little  hole  for  the  kittens  to  go  in  at,  forgetting  that  the  large 
hole  would  do  for  cats  of  all  sizes. 

Just  at  this  time  the  law  is  being  made  the  scapegoat  upon  which  all  our  finan¬ 
cial  ills  are  loaded,  and  its  immediate  and  unconditional  repe.al  is  damanded  as 
the  sole  means  by  wffiich  prosperity  can  be  restored  to  a  troubled  people. 

The  main  accusation  against  it  now  is  that  it  destroys  confidence,  and  that  foreign 
money  will  not  come  here,  because  the  holder  is  afraid  that  we  will  go  to  a  silver 
standard.  The  exportation  of  gold  has  been  pointed  to  as  conclusive  evidence 
that  frightened  English  bondholders  were  throwing  Amer’can  securities  upon  the 
market  and  selling  them  to  our  people  in  exchange  for  gold.  But  now  gold  is 
coming  back  faster  than  it  went  away,  and  still  we  have  the  Sherman  law 
unrepefcled.  Since  that  theory  will  not  exj  lain  both  the  export  and  import  of 
gold,  let  us  accept  a  theory  which  will.  The  balance  of  trade  has  been  largo  ly 
against  us  during  the  last  year,  and  gold  went  abroad  to  pay  it,  but  now  our  exporta¬ 
tion  of  breadstuffs  has  increased  and  the  gold  is  returning.  Its  going  was  aggravated 
by  the  fact  that  Austria-Hungary  was  gathering  in  gold  for  resumption  and  was 
compelled  to  take  a  part  from  us.  Instead  of  using  that  export  of  gold  as  - 
reason  forgoing  to  a  gold  basis,  it  ought  to  make  us  realize  the  danger  of  depend 
ing  solely  upon  a  metal  which  some  other  nation  may  deprive  us  of  at  a  critical 
moment. 


22 


Mr.  CA.NNON  of  Illinois.  Will  the  gentleman  permit  me  to  interrupt  him  ? 

Mr.  BRYAN.  Certainly. 

Mr.  CANNON  of  Illinois.  I  am  in  complete  harmony  with  what  my  friend  is 
eaying  now.  I  ask  him  if  he  will  i^llow  me  to  request  him  not  to  omit  to  state 
that  in  the  twelve  months  ending  June  30  last  this  same  balance  «^f  trade  that 
was  against  us  not  only  took  the  gold  of  the  United  States,  but  nearly  $17,000,000 
of  silver  as  well. 

Mr.  BRYAN.  I  think  the  statement  made  by  the  gentleman  is  correct. 

The  Sherman  law  fails  utterly  to  account  for  present  stringency.  Let  me  sug¬ 
gest  a  more  reasonable  cause  for  the  trouble.  Last  spring  an  attempt  was  made 
to  secure  the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law.  We  had  no  panic  then., 
but  the  same  forces  which  have  always  opposed  any  legislation  favorable  to  silver 
demanded  that  the  purchase  of  bullion  should  stop.  Some  who  believe  that  15 
per  cent,  reserve  makes  a  bank  safe  became  frightened  lest  a  25  or  30  per  cent, 
reserve  might  not  be  sufficient  to  make  the  Government  safe,  and  wanted  an  issue 
of  gold  bonds.  The  great  argument  used  in  favor  of  both  these  propositions  was 
that  money  was  being  drawn  from  the  Treasury  and  sent  to  Europe  ;  that  confi¬ 
dence  was  being  destroyed  and  that  a  panic  would  follow.  They  emphasized  and 
magnified  the  evils  which  would  follow  the  departure  of  gold  ;  they  worked  them¬ 
selves  and  their  associates  into  a  condition  of  fright  which  did  cause  financial 
stringency.  Like  the  man  who  innocently  gives  the  'alarm  of  fire  in  a  crowded 
hall,  they  excited  a  panic  which  soon  got  beyond  control. 

THE  REAL  TROUBLE. 

The  trouble  now  is  that  depositors  have  withdrawn  their  deposits  from  the 
banks  for  fear  of  loss,  and  the  banks  are  compelled  to  draw  in  their  loans  to  pro¬ 
tect  their  reserves,  and  thus  men  who  do  business  upon  borrowed  capital  are 
crippled.  The  people  have  not  lost  faith  in  the  Government  or  in  the  Govern¬ 
ment’s  money.  They  do  not  refuse  silver  or  silver  certificates.  They  are  glad 
enough  to  get  any  kind  of  money.  We  were  told  last  spring  that  gold  was  going 
to  a  premium,  but  recently  in  New  York  City  men  found  a  profitable  business  in  the 
selling  of  silver  certificates  of  small  denominations  at  2  per  cent,  premium  ,  and  on 
the  5tb  of  this  month  there  appeared  in  the  New  York  Herald  and  the  New  York 
Times  this  advertisement : 

WANTED— SILVER  DOLLARS.— We  desire  to  purchase  at  a  premium  of  %  per  cent,  or  $7.50  per 
thousand,  standard  silver  dollars,  in  sums  of  $1,000  or  more,  in  return  for  our  certified  checks  paya¬ 
ble  through  the  clearing-house. 

;ziMMERMAN  &  FOR3HAY,  Bankers,  11  Wall  Street. 

About  the  same  time  the  New  York  police  force  was  paid  in  $20  gold  pieces  be¬ 
cause  of  the  scarcity  of  other  kinds  of  money.  How  many  of  the  failing  banks 
have  obeyed  the  law  in  regard  to  reserve?  Hoy  many  have  crippled  themselves 
by  loaning  too  much  to  their  officers  and  directors  ?  The  situation  can  be  stated 
in  a  few  words  :  money  cannot  be  secured  to  carry  on  business  because  the  banks 
have  no  money  to  loan  ;  banks  have  no  money  to  loan  because  the  depositors 
have  withdrawn  their  money ;  depositors  have  withdrawn  their  money  because 
they  fear  the  solvency  of  the  banks ;  enterprises  are  stagnant  because  money 
is  not  in  circulation. 

FAMINE  WILL  NOT  CURE  HUNGER. 

Will  a  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  cure  these  evils  ?  Can  you  cure  hunger  by  a 
famine  ?  I  know  that  there  are  some  who  tell  us  that  we  have  plenty  of  money.  If 
I  may  be  pardoned  for  a  personal  allusion,  their  attitude  reminds  me  of  a  remark 
made  by  my  father-in-law  just  after  he  intrusted  his  daughter  to  my  care,  “  Wil¬ 
liam,”  said  he,  laying  his  hand  aflfectionately  on  my  head,  “  while  I  have  we  shall 
not  both  want.”  Others  say,  “  What  is  the  use  of  having  more  money?  We  can¬ 
not  get  it  unless  we  have  something  to  sell.”  That  is  true;  but  the  price  of 
what  we  sell  depends  largely  upon  the  amount  of  money  in  circulation.  How 
43an  we  pay  our  debts  without  selling  something,  and  how  can  we  sell  anything 


23 


/ 


’unlegfl  there  is  money  in  circulation  to  buy  with?  We  need  money.  The  Sherman 
law  supplies  a  certain  amount.  Will  the  stringency  be  relieved  by  suspending^ 
’  that  issue?  If  the  advocates  of  repeal  would  take  for  their  battle  cry,  “Stop 
issuing  money,’’  instead  of  “  Stop  buying  silver,”  wouM  not  their  purpose  be 
more  plain  ?  But  they  say  the  repeal  of  the  law  will  encourage  foreign  capital 
to  come  here  by  giving  as8uran'^*e  that  it  will  be  repaid  on  a  gold  basis.  Can 
we  afford  to  buy  confidence  at  that  price  ?  Can  we  aflford  to  abandon  the  con¬ 
stitutional  right  to  pay  in  either  gold  or  silver  in  order  to  borrow  foreign  gold 
with  th^  certainty  of  having  to  pay  it  back  in  appreciated  dollars  ?  To  my  mind, 

>  Mr.  Speaker,  the  remedy  proposed  seems  not  only  dangerous  Jteid  absurd,  but 
entirely  inadequate.  Why  try  to  borrow  foreign  capital  in  order  to  induce  the 
people  in  this  country  to  redeposit  their  savings  in  the  banks  ? 

A  SUGGESTION. 

Why  do  not  these  financiers  apply  the  remedy  to  the  diseased  part?  If  the 
gentleman  from  New  York  [Mr.  Hendrix],  to  whom  I  listened  with  pleasure, 
and  who  said,  “I  have  come  into  this  Hall  as  a  banker,  I  am  here  as  the  presi¬ 
dent  of  a  national  bank,”  desires  to  restore  confidence,  let  him  propose  for  the 
consideration  of  the  members  a  bill  to  raise,  by  a  small  tax  upon  deposits,  a  sum  suf¬ 
ficient  to  secure  depositors  against  possible  loss;  or  a  bill  to  compel  stockholders  to 
put  up  security  for  their  double  liability  ;  or  to  prevent  stockholders  or  officers 
from  wrecking  a  bank  to  carry  on  their  private  business  ;  or  to  limit  the  liabilities 
which  a  bank  can  assume  upon  a  given  amount  of  capital,  so  that  there  will  be 
more  margin  to  protect  its  creditors  ;  or  a  bill  to  make  more  severe  the  punish¬ 
ment  for  embezzlement,  so  that  a  man  can  not  rob  a  bank  of  a  half  million  and  es¬ 
cape  with  five  years,  and  can  not  be  boarded  at  a  hotel  by  a  marshal,  while  the 
Hsmall  thief  suffers  in  a  dungeon.  [Applause.]  Let  him  propose  some  real  relief 
and  this  House  will  be  glad  to  cooperate  with  him. 

Or,  if  there  is  immediate  relief  necessary  in  the  increased  issue  of  paper  money, 
let  our  financiers  press  the  suggestion  made  by  the  gentleman  from  Ohio  [Mr. 
Johnson],  viz.  that  the  holders  of  Government  bonds  be  allowed  to  deposit  them 
and  draw  the  face  in  Treasury  notes  by  remitting  the  interest  and  with  the  power 
of  redeeming  the  bonds  at  any  time.  [Applause.]  This  will  give  immediate  re¬ 
lief  and  will  save  the  Government  interest  on  the  bonds  while  the  money  is 
out.  But  no,  the  only  remedy  proposed  by  these  financiers  at  this  time,  when 
business  is  at  a  standstill  and  when  men  are  suffering  unemployed,  is  a  remedy 
which  will  enable  them  to  both  control  the  currency  and  reap  pecuniary  profit 
through  its  issue. 

MORE  MONEY  NEEDED. 

One  of  the  benefits  of  the  Sherman  law,  so  far  as  the  currency  is  concerned,  is" 
that  it  compels  the  issue  of  a  large  amount  of  money  annually,  and  but  for  this 
issue  the  present  financial  panic  would,  in  my  judgment,  be  far  more  severe  than 
it  is.  That  we  need  an  annual  increase  in  the  currency  is  urged  by  Mr.  Sherman 
himself  in  a  speech  advocating  the  passage  of  the  Sherman  law.  On  the  5th  day 
of  June,  1890,  h8  said  in  the  Senate : 

Under  the  law  of  |February,  1878,  the  purchase  of  $2,000,000  worth  of  silver  bullion  a  month  has 
by  coinage  produced  annually  an  average  of  nearly  $3,000,000  per  month  for  a  period  of  twelve 
years,  but  this  amount,  in  view  of  the  retirement  of  the  bank  notes,  will  not  increase  our  currency 
in  proportion  to  our  increasing  population.  If  our  present  currency  is  estimated  at  $1,400,000,000, 
and  our  population  is  increasing  at  the  ratio  of  3  per  cent,  per  annum,  it  would  require  $42,000,000 
Increased  circulation  each  year  to  keep  pace  with  the  increase  of  population  ;  but  as  the  increase  of 
»  population  is  accompanied  by  a  still  greater  ratio  of  increase  of  wealth  and  business,  it  was  thought 
that  an  immediate  increase  of  circulation  might  be  obtained  by  larger  purchases  of  silver  bul¬ 
lion  to  an  amount  sufficient  to  make  good  the  requirement  of  bank  notes  and  keep  pace  with  the 
growth  of  population.  Assuming  that  $54,000,000  a  year  of  additional  currency  is  needed  upon  this 
basis,  that  amount  is  provided  for  in  this  bill  by  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes  in  exchange  for  bullion 
at  the  market  price. 

This  amount,  by  the  fall  in  the  price  of  bullion  silver,  has  been  largely  reduced. 
Shall  we  wipe  it  out  entirely  ?  He  insisted  that  the  Sherman  law  gave  to  the 


I 


24 


people  more  money  than  the  Bland  law,  and  upon  that  ground  its  passage  was 

defended  before  the  people.  Could  it  have  been  passed  had  it  given  less  than  the 
Bland  law  ?  Who  would  have  dared  to  defend  it  if  it  had  provided  for  no  money 
at  all  ? 

What  provision  shall  be  made  for  the  future?  Upon  that  question  our  oppo¬ 
nents  are  silent.  The  bill  which  they  have  proposed  leaves  us  with  no  increased 
currency  TDrovided  for.  Some  of  the  advocates  of  a  gold  standard,  in  the  defense 
of  their  theory,  find  it  necessary  to  dispute  every  well-established  principle  of 
finance. 

We  are  told  that  as  civilization  increases  credit  takes  the  place  of  money  and 
that  the  volume  of  real  money  can  be  diminished  without  danger.  That 
recalls  the  experience  of  the  man  who  conceived  the  idea  that  a  fish  could 
be  made  to  live  without  water.  As  the  story  goes,  he  put  a  herring,  fresh  from 
the  sea,  in  a  jar  of  salt  water.  By  removing  a  little  every  morning  and  adding 
rainwater  he  gradually  accustomed  it  to  fresh  water.  Then  by  gradually  remov¬ 
ing  the  fresh  water  he  accustomed  it  to  air  and  finally  kept  it  in  a  cage  like  a 
bird.  One  day,  in  his  absence,  his  servant  placed  a  cup  of  water  in  the  cage  in 
order  that  the  fish  might  moisten  its  food;  but  alas  !  when  the  master  came  home 
he  found  that  the  fish  had  thoughtlessly  put  its  head  into  the  water  and  drowned ! 

From  the  arguments  of  some  of  our  opponents  we  might  be  led  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  time  would  come  when  money  would  not  only  be  unncessary  but  really 
dangerous. 


REAL  OR  CREDIT  MONEY? 

• 

The  question,  Mr.  Speaker,  is  whether  we  shall  increase  our  suppl}-^  of  priml 
ary  money,  as  we  do  when  we  increase  our  gold  and  silver,  or  whether  we  shal 
increase  our  promises  to  pay  real  money,  as  we  do  when  we  increase  national  bank 
notes. 

Mr.  BLAND.  Will  the  gentleman  permit  a  suggestion? 

Mr.  BEYAN.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  BLAND.  The  Treasury  no^es  is  ued  under  the  law  for  the  purchase  of  the 
silver  bullion  are  legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private,  and  not  like  bank 
notes,  mere  credit  money. 

Mr.  BEY' AN.  I  understand  that.  I  say  they  are  primary  money ;  although  if  it 
were  construed  to  mean  that  they  were  merely  a  promise  to  pay  gold,  then  they 
would  be  simply  credit  money  to  that  extent, 

Mr.  BLAND,  The  distinction  I  wish  to  draw  is  this,  that  those  Treasury  notes 
issued  in  purchase  of  silver  bullion  are  legal  tender  while  a  bank  note  is  not. 

Mr.  BEYAN.  And  the  distinction  is  a  very  just  one. 

The  larger  ‘he  superstructure  of  credit,  as  related  to  the  basis  of  metal,  the  more 
unsubstantial  our  syatem.  If  we  present  a  bank  note  for  payment  we  receive  a 
greenback  ;  if  we  present  a  greenback  for  payment,  the  treasurer  has  a  right  to  pay 
in  silver  dollars,  and  now  our  opponents  want  it  understood  that  a  silver  dollar  is 
only  a  promise  to  pay  a  gold  dollar.  Is  that  sound  money  ? 

No,  Mr.  Speaker;  if  met^sliic  money  is  sound  money,  then  w^e  who  instist  upon  a 
base  broad  enought  to  supp irt  a  currency  redeemable  in  coin  on  demand,  are  the 
real  friends  of  sound  money,  and  those  are  dangerous  fiatists’'  who  would  make 
the  metallic  base  so  narrow  as  to  compel  the  Government  to  abandon  it  for  the  pre¬ 
servation  of  its  people.  If  all  the  currency  is  built  upon  the  small  basis  of  gold 
those  who  hold  the  gold  will  be  the  masters  of  the  situation.  [Applause.]  We 
have  a  right  to  demand  that  the  future  financial  policy  shall  be  a  part  of  the  repeal¬ 
ing  acb  so  that  we  may  choose  between  it  and  what  we  have  and  reject  it  if  it  is  less 
favorable  than  the  present  law.  And  I  may  add  in  the  language  adopted  by  the 
bimetallic  league  a  few  days  ago — 

The  refusal  of  the  opponents  of  bimetallism  to  propose  any  substitute  for  the  present  law,  or  to 
elaborate  any  plan  for  the  future,  indicates  either  an  Ignorance  of  our  financial  needs  or  an  unwill¬ 
ingness  to  take  the  public  into  their  confidence. 


25 


THE  GREAT  OBJECTION. 

But,  sir,  more  serious  than  any  other  objection  which  can  be  made  to  the  uncon¬ 
ditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  is  the  incontrovertible  fact  that  a  suspension 
of  silver  would  tend  to  lower  the  price  of  silver  bullion  and  thus  make  the  restora¬ 
tion  of  bimetallism  more  difficult.  That  this  will  be  the  effect  is  proven  not  only 
by  reason  but  by  the  utterances  of  Mr.  Herschell’s  committee  in  discussing  the 
finances  of  India.  That  report  says : 

In  December  last,  a  bill  was  introduced  in  the  Senate  to  rej)eal  the  Sherman  act,  and  another 
to  suspend  purchases  under  it.  Whether  any  s\ich  measures  will  pass  into  law  it  is  impossible 
to  foretell,  but  it  must  be  regarded  as  possible  ;  and  although,  in  the  light  of  past  experience, 
predictions  on  such  a  subject  must  be  made  with  caution,  it  is  certainly  probable  that  the  repeal  of 
the  Sherman  act  would  be  followed  by  a  heavy  fall  in  the  price  of  silver. 

The  first  question  for  us  to  decide  then  is,  are  we  in  favor  of  bimetallism  or  a 
universal  gold  standard  ?  If  we  are  in  favor  of  bimetallism,  the  next  question  is 
will  a  fall  in  the  bullion  price  of  silver  as  measured  by  gold  help  or  hinder 
bimetallism  ?  We  are  told  by  those  who  want  a  gold  standard  that  it  will  help 
bimetallism ;  but  the  query  is,  if  it  would,  “  why  do  they  favor  it  ?”  It  is  sufficient 
to  arouse  suspicion  when  every  advocate  of  gold  monometallism  favors  uncondi¬ 
tional  repeal,  and  the  more  emphatic  his  advocacy  of  gold  the  more  earnesr,  his 
desire  for  repeal.  Is  any  subsequent  legislation  in  behalf  of  silver  intended?  If 
so,  why  not  propose  it  now?  What  money  loaner,  loaning  upon  a  mortgage, 
would  be  willing  to  let  the  money  go  upon  a  promise  that  the  mortgage  should  be 
delivered  next  week  ?  Or  what  business  man  would  cancel  an  obligation  to-day 
on  the  promise  of  having  the  money  paid  to-morrow  ?  Shall  we  be  more  careless 
in  protecting  the  sacred  interests  of  our  constituencies  than  a  business  man  is  in 
transacting  his  business  ? 

What  excuse  can  we  give  to  our  people  for  releasing  what  we  have  with  the 
expectation  of  getting  something  in  the  future  when  the  advocates  of  repeal  boldly 
demand,  upon  this  floor,  the  adoption  of  a  universal  gold  standard,  and  predict 
that  its  coming  is  as  certain  as  the  rising  of  to-morrow’s  sun.  Bead  the  utterances 
of  these  leaders  in  the  crusade  against  silver.  Bead  the  famous  article  of  the  dis¬ 
tinguished  gentleman  from  New  York  [Mr.  Cockran].  Bead  the  article  in  the 
Forum  of  last  February,  from  the  pen  of  Hon.  George  Fred  Williams,  who,  in  the 
last  Congress,  spoke  for  those  demanding  unconditioral  repeal; 

In  the  efforts  which  have  thus  far  been  made  towards  a  repeal,  a  single  question  has  been 
repeated  by  the  silver  men  so  often  as  to  give  a  plain  indication  to  the  situation.  What,  it  is  asked, 
do  you  i propose  to  put  in  place  of  silver  purchases?  There  never  was  a  time  more  opportune  to 
answer  definitely  this  question  with  the  single  word,  nothing. 

t 

Let  me  join  issue  upon  this  question,  and  say  that  the  time  will  never  come  in 
this  country  when  that  word  “nothing”  will  b3  accepted  as  a  satisfacto.y 
answer. 

GARBLING, 

They  tell  us  that  our  platform  demands  repeal,  but  does  it  demand  repeal  only  ? 
Shall  we  take  away  the  “cowardly  makeshift”  before  we  restore  the  real  thing 
for  which  that  “temporary  expedient”  was  substituted?  As  well  denounce  one 
kind  of  food  because  it  lacks  nourishment  and  then  refuse  all  food  to  the  patient. 
They  shall  not  be  pefmited  to  thus  mutilate  the  platform.  No  such  inexcusable 
attempt  at  garbling  has  been  witnessed  since  the  minister  took  from  the  sentence 
“  Let  him  which  is  on  the  house-top  not  come  down  to  take  anything  out  of  his 
house  ”  the  words  “  topnot  come  down,”  and  inveighed  against  the  feminine  habit 
of  wearing  the  hair  in  a  knot  on  the  top  of  the  head.  [Laughter.]  They  demand 
of  us  unconditional  repeal.  They  demand  that  we  give  up  all  that  we  have  in  the 
M^ay  of  silver  legislation  before  we  know  what  we  are  to  receive.  Shall  we  sur¬ 
render  on  these  terms? 


ARE  WE  CARTUAGENIANS? 


Rollin  tells  us  that  the  third  Punic  war  was  declared  by  the  Romans  and  that  a 
messenger  was  sent  to  Carthage  to  announce  the  declaration  after  the  army  had 
started  on  its  way.  The  Carthagenians  at  once  sent  representatives  to  treat  for 
peace.  The  Romans  first  demanded  the  delivery  of  three  hundred  hostages 
before  they  would  enter  into  negotiations.  When  three  hundred  sons  of  the 
nobles  had  been  given  into  their  hands  they  demanded  the  surrender  of  all  the 
arms  and  implements  of  war  before  announcing  the  terms  of  the  treaty.  The 
conditions  were  sorrowfully  but  promptly  complied  with,  and  the  people  who 
boasted  of  a  Hannibal  and  a  Hamilcar  gave  up  to  their  ancient  enemies  every 
weapon  of  offense  and  defense.  TJien  the  Roman  consul,  rising  up  before  the 
humiliated  representatives  of  Carthage,  said: 

I  cannot  but  commend  you  for  the  readiness  with  which  you  have  obeyed  every  order.  The 
decree  of  the  Roman  Senate  is  that  Carthage  shall  be  destroyed. 

Sirs,  what  will  be  the  answer  of  the  people  whom  you  represent,  who  are 
wedded  to  the  “gold  and  silver  coinage  of  the  Constitution,”  if  you  vote  for 
unconditional  repeal  and  return  to  U 11  them  that  you  were  commended  for  the 
readiness  with  which  you  obeyed  every  order,  but  that  Congress  has  decreed  that 
one-half  of  the  people’s  metallic  money  shall  be  destroyed?  [Applause.] 

They  demand  unconditional  surrender,  do  they  ?  Why,  sirs,  we  are  the  ones  to 
grant  terms.  Standing  by  the  pledges  of  a  1  the  parties  in  this  country,  backed 
by  the  history  of  a  hundred  years,  sustained  by  the  most  sacred  interests  of 
humanity  itself,  we  demand  an  unconditional  surrender  of  the  principle  of  gold 
monometallism  as  the  first  condition  of  peace.  [Applause.]  You  demand  sur¬ 
render!  Ay,  sirs,  you  may  cry  “  Peace,  peace,”  but  there  is  no  peace.  Just  so 
long  as  there  are  people  here  who  would  chain  this  country  to  a  single  gold 
standard,  there  is  war — eternal  war ;  and  it  might  just  as  well  be  known  now ! 
[Loud  applause  on  the  Democratic  side.]  I  haye  said  that  we  stand  by  the 
pledges  of  all  platforms.  Let  me  quote  them  : 

POPULISTS,  1892. 

The  Populist  platform  adopted  by  the  national  convention  in  1892  contained 
these  words  : 

We  demand  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  and  gold  at  the  present  legal  ratio  of  16  to  1, 

As  the  members  of  that  party,  both  in  the  Senate  and  in  the  House,  stand 
ready  to  carry  out  the  pledge  there  made,  no  appeal  to  them  is  necessary. 

THE  REPUBLICAN  POSITION. 

1888. 

The  Republican  national  platform  adopted  in  1888  contains  this  plank  : 

The  Republican  party  is  in  favor  of  the  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  money  and  condemns  the 
^policy  of  the  Democratic  administration  in  its  efforts  to  demonetize  siiver. 

1892. 

The  same  party  in  1892  adopted  a  platform  containing  the  following  language  : 

The  American  people  from  tradition  and  interest  favor  bimetallism, and  the  Republican  party  de¬ 
mands  the  use  of  tx)tn  gold  and  silver  as  standard  money,  such  restrictioifs  to  be  determined  by 
contemplation  of  values  of  the  two  metals,  so  that  the  purchasing  and  debt-paying  power  of  the 
dollar,  whether  of  silver,  gold,  or  paper,  shall  be  equal  at  all  times. 

The  interests  of  the  producers  of  the  country,  its  farmers  and  its  workingmen,  demand  that  every 
dollar,  paper  or  gold,  issued  by  the  Government,  shall  be  as  good  as  any  other.  We  commend  the 
wise  and  patriotic  steps  already  taken  by  our  Government  to  secure  an  international  parity  of  value 
between  gold  and  silver  for  use  as  money  throughout  the  world. 

Are  the  Republican  members  of  this  House  ready  to  abandon  the  svstem  which 
the  American  people  favor  “  from  tradition  and  interest  ?  ”  Having  won  a  Presi¬ 
dential  election  upon  a  platform  which  condemned  “  the  policy  of  the  Democratic 


27 

admiDifetration  in  its  (  fi’orts  to  demonetize  silver, ”  are  they  ready  to  join  in  that 
demagnetization?  Havirg  advocated  the  Sherman  law  because  it  gave  an  increased 
use  of  silver,  are  they  reac  y  to  repeal  it  aE  d  make  no  provisions  for  silver  at  all  ?  Are 
they  \\  tiling  to  go  before  the  country  confessing  that  they  secured  the  present  law 
by  sharp  practice,  and  only  adopted  it  as  an  ingenious  device  for  preventing  free 
coinage,  to  be  repealed  as  soon  as  the  hour  of  danger  was  passed? 

THE  DEMOCRATIC  POSITION. 

1880. 

The  Democratic  platform  of  1880  contained^hese  words ; 

Honest  money,  consisting  of  gold  and  silver,  and  paper  convertible  into  coin  on  demand. 

It  would  seem  that  at  that  time  silver  was  honest  money,  although  the  bullion 
value  was  considerably  below  the  coinage  value. 

1884. 

In  1884  the  Democratic  platform  contained  this  plank : 

We  believe  in  bonest  money,  the  gold  and  silver  coinage  of  the  Constitution,  and  a  circulating 
medium  convertible  into  such  money  without  loss. 

It  woul  1  seem  that  at  that  time  silver  was  considered  honest  money. 

1888. 

In  1888  the  Democratic  party  did  not  express  itself  on  the  money  question 
except  by  saying : 

It  renewed  the  pledge  of  its  fidelity  to  Democratic  faith,  and  reafiirms  the  platform  adopted  by  its 
representatives  in  the  convention  of  1884. 

Since  the  platform  of  1884  commended  silver  as  an  honest  money,  we  must 
assume  that  the  reaffirming  of  that  platform  declared  anew  that  silver  was  honest 
money  as  late  as  1888,  although  at  that  time  its  bullion  value  had  fallen  still  more. 

1892. 

The  1  ist  utterance  of  a  Democratic  national  convention  upon  this  subject  is 
contained  in  the  platform  adopted  at  Chicago  in  1892  It  is  as  follows: 

We  denounce  the  Republican  legislation  known  as  the  Sherman  act  of  1890  as  a  cowardly  make¬ 
shift,  fraught  with  possibilities  of  danger  in  the  future,  which  should  make  all  of  its  supporters,  as 
well  as  its  author,  anxious  for  its  speedy  repeal.  We  hold  to  the  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  the 
standard  money  of  the  country,  and  to  the  coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver  without  discrimination 
against  either  metal  or  charge'for  mintage,  but  the  dollar  unit  of  coinage  of  both  metals  must  be  of 
equal  intrinsic  and  exchangeable  value  or  be  adjusted  through  international  agreement,  or  by  such 
safeguards  of  legislation  as  shall  insure  the  maintenance  of  the  parity  of  the  two  metals,  and  the 
equal  power  of  every  dollar  at  all  times  in  the  markets  and  in  the  payment  of  debts  ;  and  we 
demand  that  all  paper  currency  shall  be  kept  at  par  with  and  redeemable  in  such  coin.  We  insist 
upon  this  policy  as  especially  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  farmers  and  laboring  classes,  the 
first  and  most  defenseless  victims  of  unstable  money  and  a  fluctuating  currency. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  gold  and  silver  have  been  indissolubly  linked  together 
in  our  platiorms.  Never  in  the  history  of  the  party  has  it  taken  a  position  in 
favor  of  a  gold  standard.  Oa  every  vote  taken  in  the  House  and  Senate  a 
majority  of  the  party  have  been  recorded  not  only  in  favor  of  bimetallism,  but 
for  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  1. 

SHALL  WE  REPUDIATE  OUR  PLEDGES  ? 

The  last  platform  pledges  us  to  the  use  of  both  metals  as  standard  money  and 
to  the  free  coinage  of  both  metals  at  a  fixed  ratio.  Does  anyone  believe  that  Mr. 
Cleveland  could  have  been  elected  President  upon  a  platform  declaring  in  favor 
of  the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  ?  Can  we  go  back  to  our  people 
and  tell  them  that,  after  denouncing  for  twenty  years  the  crime  of  1873,  we  have 
at  last  accepted  it  as  a  blessing  ?  Shall  bimetallism  receive  its  deathblow  in  the 


28 


House  of  its  friends,  and  in  the  very  Hall  where  innumerable  vows  have  been 
registered  in  its  defense  ?  What  faith  can  be  placed  in  platforms  if  their  pledges 
can  be  violated  with  impunity  ?  Is  it  right  to  rise  above  the  power  which  cre¬ 
ated  us  ?  Is  it  patriotic  to  refuse  that  legislation  in  favor  of  gold  and  silver  which 
a  majority  of  the  people  have  always  demanded  ?  Is  it  necessary  to  betray  all 
parties  in  order  to  treat  this  subject  in  a  ‘  nonpartisan”  way? 

The  President  has  recommended  unconditional  repeal.  It  is  not  sufficient  to 
say  that  he  is  honest — so  were  the  mothers,  who,  with  misguided  zeal,  threw 
their  children  into  the  Ganges.  The  question  is  not  “Is  he  honest  ?”  but  “Is  he 
right?  ’  He  won  the  confidence  of  the  toilers  of  this  country  because  he  taught 
that  “public  office  is  a  public  trust,”  and  because  he  convinced  them  of  his  courage 
and  his  sincerity.  But  are  they  willing  to  say,  in  the  language  of  Job,  “Though 
He  slay  me,  yet  will  I  trust  Him  ?”  Whence  comes  this  irresistible  demand  for 
nnconditional  repeal?  Are  not  the  representa  ives  here  as  near  to  the  people 
and  as  apt  to  know  their  wishes ?  Whence  comes  the  demand?  Not  from  the 
workshop  and  the  farm,  not  from  the  workingmen  of  this  country,  who  create  its 
wealth  in  time  of  peace  and  protect  its  flag  in  time  of  war,  but  from  the  middle¬ 
men,  from  what  are  termed  the  “business  interests,”  and  largely  from  that  class 
wh:ch  can  force  Congress  to  let  it  issue  money  at  a  pecuniary  profit  to  itself  if 
Silver  is  abandoned.  The  President  has  been  deceived.  He  can  no  more  judge 
the  wishes  of  the  great  mass  of  our  p  so  pie  by  the  expressions  of  these  men  than 
he  can  measure  the  ocean’s  silent  depths  by  the  foam  upon  its  waves. 

THE  MASSES  OPPOSE  UNCONDITIONAL  KEPEAL. 

Mr.  Powderly,  who  spoke  at  Chicago  a  few  days  ago  in  favor  of  the  free  coin¬ 
age  of  silver  at  the  present  ratio  and  against  the  uncondidonal  repeal  of  the  Sher¬ 
man  law,  voic' d  the  senfiment  of  more  laboring  men  than  have  ever  addressed  the 
Preside  lit  or  this  House  in  %vor  of  repeal.  Go  among  the  ag  icultural  classes ;  go 
among  the  poor,  whose  little  is  as  precious  to  them  as  tli^^  r’ch  man’s  fortune  is  to 
him, and  whose  families  are  as  dear,  and  you  will  not  find  the  haste  to  destroy  !he 
issue  of  money  or  the  un^rlend’inessto  silver  which  is  manifestec  in  mon=y  centers. 

This  question  can  not  be  Srtthd  by  typewritten  recommendations  and  suggestions 
made  by  bonds  of  trade  and  sent  broadcast  over  the  United  Srntes.  It  can  only  be 
settled  by  the  grea^^^  mass  of  the  voters  of  this  country  who  stand  like  the  Roek  of 
Gioralihr  for  the  use  of  both  gold  and  silver.  [Applause.] 

There  are  thousands,  yes,  tens  of  thousands,  aye,  ev^en  millions,  who  have  not  yet 
“  bowed  the  knee  to  Basil.”  Let  the  President  take  courage.  Muehlbach  relates  an 
incident  in  the  life  of  the  great  mili  ary  hero  of  Francf^.  At  Marengo  the  Man  of 
Destiny,  sad  and  disheartened,  thought  the  battle  lost.  He  called  to  a  drummer 
boy  and  ordered  him  to  beat  a  retreat.  The  lad  replied : 

Sire,  I  do  not  know  how.  Dessaix  has  never  taught  me  retreat,  but  I  can  heat  a  charge.  Oh,  I  can 
beat  a  charge  that  would  make  the  dead  fall  into  line  !  I  beat  that  charge  at  the  Bridge  of  Lodi ;  I 
heat  it  at  Mount  Tahor  ;  I  beat  it  at  the  Pyramids ;  Oh,  may  I  beat  it  here  ? 

The  charge  was  ordered,  the  battle  won,  and  Marengo  was  added  to  the  victories 
of  Napoleon.  Oh,  let  our  gallant  leader  draw  inspiration  from  the  street  gamin 
of  Paris.  In  the  face  of  au  enemy  proud  and  confident  the  President  has  wavered. 
Engaged  in  the  battle  royal  between  the  “  money  power  and  the  common  people” 
he  has  ordered  a  retreat.  Let  him  not  be  dismayed. 

He  has  won  greater  victories  than  Napoleon,  for  he  is  a  warrior  who  has  con¬ 
quered  without  a  sword.  He  restored  fidelity  in  the  public  service  ;  he  converted 
Democratic  hope  into  realization;  he  took  up  the  banner  of  tariff  reform  and 
carried  it  to  triumph.  Let  him  continue  that  greater  fight  for  “  the  gold  and  silver 
cc  inage  of  the  Constitution,”  to  which  three  national  platforms  have  pledged  him. 
Let  his  clarion  voice  call  the  party  hosts  to  arms;  let  him  but  speak  the  language 
of  the  Senator  from  Texas,  in  reply  to  those  who  would  destroy  the  use  of  silver  : 

Uln  this  hour  fraught  mth  peril  to  the  whole  country,!  appeal  totheiunpurchased  representatives  oi 
the  American  people  to  meet  this  bold  and  insolent  demand  like  men.  Let  us  stand  in  the  breach 
and  call  the  battle  on  and  never  leave  the  field  until  the  people’s  money  shall  be  restored  to  the 
mints  on  equal  terms  with  gold,  as  it  was  years  ago. 


i. 


29 


Let  this  command  be  given,  and  the  air  will  resound  with  the  tramp  of  men 
scarred  in  a  score  of  battles  for  the  people’s  rights.  Let  this  command  be  given 
and  this  Marengo  will  be  our  glory  and  not  our  shame.  [Appluse  on  the  floor 
and  in  the  galleries.] 

THE  PARTING  OF  THE  WAYS. 

Well  has  it  been  said  by  the  Senator  from  Missouri  [Mr.  Vest]  that  we  have 
come  to  the  parting  of  the  ways.  To  day  the  Democratic  party  stands  between 
two  great  forces,  each  inviting  its  support.  On  the  one  side  stand  the  corporate 
interests  of  the  nation,  its  moneyed  institutions,  its  aggregations  of  wealth  and 
capital,  imperious,  arrogant  compassionless.  They  demand  special  legislation, 
favors,  privileges,  and  immunities.  They  can  subscribe  magnificently  to  campaign 
funds ;  they  can  strike  down  opposition  with  their  all-pervading  influence,  and,  to 
those  who  fawn  and  flatter,  bring  ease  and  plenty.  They  demand  that  the  Demo¬ 
cratic  par'y  shall  become  their  agent  to  execute  their  merciless  decrees. 

On  the  other  side  stands  that  unnumbered  throng  which  gave  a  name  to  the 
Democratic  party  and  for  which  it  has  assumed  to  speak.  Work-worn  and  dust- 
begrimed,  they  make  their  sad  appeal.  They  hear  of  average  wealth  increased 
on  every  side  and  feel  the  ineq^mlity  of  its  distribution.  They  see  an  over-produc¬ 
tion  of  everything  desired  because  of  the  underproduction  of  the  ability  to  buy. 
They  can  not  pay  for  loyalty  except  with  their  suffrages,  and  can  only  punish 
betrayal  with  their  condemnation.  Although  the  ones  who  most  deserve  the  fos¬ 
tering  care  of  Government,  their  cries  for  help  too  often  beat  in  vain  against  the 
outer  wall,  while  others  less  deserving  find  ready  access  to  legislative  halls. 

This  army,  vast  and  daily  vaster  growing,  begs  the  party  to  be  its  champion  in 
the  present  conflict.  It  "cannot  press  its  claims  ’mid  sounds  of  revelry.  Its 
phalanxes  do  not  form  in  grand  parade,  nor  has  it  gaudy  banners  floating  on  the 
breeze.  Its  battle  hymn  is  “  Home,  Sweet  Home,’’  its  war  cry  “  equality  before 
the  law.”  To  the  Democratic  party,  standing  between  these  two  irreconcilable 
forces,  uncertain  to  which  side  to  turn,  and  conscious  that  upon  its  choice  its  fate 
depends,  come  the  words  of  Israel’s  second  lawgiver :  “  Choose  you  this  day  whom 
ye  will  serve.”  What  will  the  answer  be?  Let  me  invoke  the  memory  of  him 
whose  dust  made  sacred  the  soil  of  Monticello  when  he  joined 

The  dead  but  sceptered  sovereigns  who  still  rule 
Our  spirits  from  their  urns. 

He  was  called  ^  demagogue  and  his  followers  a  mob,  but  the  immortal  Jefferson 
dared  to  follow  the  best  promptings  of  his  heart.  He  placed  mian  above  matter, 
humanity  above  property,  and,  spurning  the  bribes  of  wealth  and  power,  pleaded 
the  cause  of  the  common  people.  It  was  this  devotion  to  their  interests  which 
made  his  party  invincible  while  he  lived  and  will  make  his  name  revered  while 
history  endur 's.  And  what  message  comes  to  us  from  the  Hermitage?  When  a 
crisis  like  the  present  arose  and  the  national  bank  of  his  day  sought  to  control  the 
politics  of  the  nation,  God  raised  up  an  Andrew  Jackson,  who  had  the  courage  to 
grapple  with  that  great  enemy,  and  by  overthrowing  it,  he  made  himself  the  idol 
of  the  peopl  r  and  reinstated  the  Domocratic  party  in  public  confidence.  What  will 
the  decision  be  to-day  ?  The  Demccratic  party  has  won  the  greatest  success  in  its 
history.  Standing  upon  this  victory-crowned  summit,  will  it  turn  its  face  to  the 
rising  or  the  setting  sun?  Will  it  choose  blessings  or  cursings — life  or  death — 
which?  Whi*h?  f Prolonged  applause  on  the  floor  and  in  the  galleries,  and 
cries  of  ‘"Vote!”  “Vote!”] 


'■  I.'-  A 

f  '  '  ’  'r!  ■  •  '  ^ 

•'■•'*  '•s  ^'''''  ■  :  f  ■•  ■'  ‘\v^i  V  ‘^**- 

.  .J  .  nt  i»  .  x*i  ,,^  I  ■  r 


;,.vA  ’’■ /•Jsti^’''  '  ■  ' 


V-^'  'Adi 


►•  ■  -^  .  mmr 

-  »:-i  ^  CTv. 


wm 


.1) ,  ..  I  .  V-  ;  ,  •'  /•/.•  ;.  i  j* '# 'i'  ■  ’  J  •rf-' 

^  fm.  4^-  y  .9 

P^  i.  Ia,..  ..  ^  C  U-.9« -'^r  .■*v<'»-' :  J  < 


t?"*  ■•■ "  ■ ;  ■ 

>•-  -  :'  .>  .:■ 


;•- 1*’  V'  '  .  '  0>.‘ .  \  ‘  *  1*4. 

‘  ife""  ■'*  ,’*  ',/  jb;  V  « 

,  ".-  -aT'A''  -VV  ^  *  ’  ■>  •  ■ 

5  -•  A:Av#  ;  ■ 


5»'  >  w:' 

--4 

'> 

O' 

*'■  ■f- 

-"  .  .'i..  TV?.  ‘  j  1  >  « 

'3'c. 

<< 


■VJ 

•4 


- . .  V  ■  •-;• 


'-  4  • 


5r 


*>>' 


r-x 


